Effects of assistive technology for students with reading and writing disabilities

References

• Hessler GL. Who is really learning disabled? In: Sornson B, editors. Preventing early learning failure. Alexandria (VA): ASCD USA; 2001. p. 21–36.
   Google Scholar
• Statens Beredning för Medicinsk Utvärdering, SBU [Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment]. Dyslexi hos barn och ungdomar: tester och insatser; en systematisk översikt. Mölnycke: Elanders Sverige AB; 2014. (No. 225/2014).
   Google Scholar
• Fälth L, Gustafson S, Tjus T, et al. Computer-assisted interventions targeting reading skills of children with reading disabilities–a longitudinal study. Dyslexia. 2013;19:37–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torgesen JK, Alexander AW, Wagner RK, et al. Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. J Learn Disabil. 2001;34:33–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkeley S, Lindstrom JH. Technology for the struggling reader: free and easily accessible resources. Teach except Child. 2011;43:48–55.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel L. Understanding dyslexia and other learning disabilities. Vancouver (BC): Pacific Educational Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Edyburn DL. Technology-enhanced reading performance: defining a research agenda. Read Res Quart. 2007;42:146–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edyburn DL, editor. Efficacy of assistive technology interventions. Vol. 1. Emerald Group Publishing; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC 13066-1:2011 Information technology — Interoperability with assistive Technology (AT). Geneva (Switzerland): ISO/IEC; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Gasparini AA, Culen AL. Tablet PCs – An Assistive Technology for students with reading difficulties? The Fifth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. IARIA. 2012.
   Google Scholar
• White DH, Robertson L. Implementing assistive technologies: a study on colearning in the Canadian elementary school context. Comp Hum Behav. 2015;51:1268–1275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindeblad E, Nilsson S, Gustafson S, et al. Assistive technology as reading interventions for children with reading impairments with a one-year follow-up. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;12:713–724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordström T, Nilsson S, Gustafson S, et al. Assistive technology applications for students with reading difficulties: special education teachers' experiences and perceptions. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018. DOI:10.1080/17483107.2018.1499142
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haßler B, Major L, Hennessy S. Tablet use in schools: a critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. J Comp Assist Learn. 2016;32:139–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furió D, Juan MC, Seguí I, et al. Mobile learning vs. traditional classroom lessons: a comparative study. J Comp Assist Learn. 2015;31:189–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perelmutter B, McGregor KK, Gordon KR. Assistive technology interventions for adolescents and adults with learning disabilities: an evidence-based systematic review and meta analysis. Comput Educ. 2017;114:139–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregg N. Increasing access to learning for the adult basic education learner with learning disabilities: evidence-based accommodation research. J Learn Disabil. 2012;45:47–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mckenna MC, Walpole S. Assistive technology in the reading clinic: its emerging potential. Read Res Quart. 2007;42:140–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodge KM. Examining the lived experience of students with reading comprehension learning disabilities and the perceived value of the accommodations received [dissertation]. 2012. The University of Toledo.
   Google Scholar
• Fälth L, Svensson I. An app as ‘reading glasses’–a study of the interaction between individual and assistive technology for students with a dyslexic profile. IJoTE. 2015;3:1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Bone EK, Bouck EC. Accessible text-to-speech options for students who struggle with reading. Prevent School Fail. 2017;61:48–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grunér S, Östberg P, Hedenius M. The compensatory effect of text-to-speech technology on reading comprehension and reading rate in Swedish schoolchildren with reading disability: The moderating effect of inattention and hyperactivity symptoms differs by grade groups. J Special Educ Technol. 2018;33:98–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer NK, Bouck EC. The impact of text-to- speech on expository reading for adolescent students with LD. J Special Educ Technol. 2014;29:21–33.
   Google Scholar
• Young MC, Courtad CA, Douglas KH, et al. The effects of text to-speech on reading outcomes for secondary students with learning disabilities. J Special Educ Technol. 2019;34:80–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood SG, Moxley JH, Tighe EL, et al. Does use of text-to speech and related read-aloud tools improve reading comprehension for students with reading disabilities? A meta analysis. J Learn Disabil. 2018;51:73–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saksida A, Iannuzzi S, Bogliotti C, et al. Phonological skills, visual attention span, and visual stress in developmental dyslexia. Dev Psychol. 2016;52:1503–1516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster SL, Mash EJ. Assessing social validity in clinical treatment research: issues and procedures. J Consult Clin Psycholog. 1999;67:308–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy CH. The maintenance of behavior change as an indicator of social validity. Behav Modificat. 2002;26:594–604.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundberg I. Läsningens psykologi och pedagogik [The psychology and pedagogy of reading]. Stockholm: Natur & Kultur; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Rack JP, Snowling MJ, Olson RK. The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: a review. Read Res Quart. 1992;27:29–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson S, Herkner B, Lundberg I. Reading and writing difficulties among prison inmates: a matter of experiential factors rather than dyslexic problems. Sci Stud Read. 2003;7:53–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warmington M, Stothard SE, Snowling MJ. Assessing dyslexia in higher education: the York adult assessment battery revised. J Res Special Educ Need. 2013;13:48–56.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson C. Läskedjor TM- Manual [Reading Chains-manual]. Stockholm: Psykologiförlaget; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Elwér Å, Fridolfsson I, Samuelsson S, et al. LäSt: Tolkning i Läsning och Stavning för åk 1-6 [Read, assessment in reading and spelling for school year 1–6]. Stockholm: Hogrefe; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Olofsson Å. Ordavkodning: mätning av fonologisk och ortografisk ordavkodningsförmåga [Decoding: Measure of phonological and orthographic decoding ability]. Östersund: Läspedagogiskt Centrum; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Lundberg I, Leven E. Vilken bild är rätt? En enkel klassdiagnos av läsförståelse [Which picture is the correct one? A simple diagnos of reading comprehension]. Studentlitteratur. 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Woodcock RW. Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests: WRMT-III. Pearson. The sub test listening comprehension, translated into the Swedish language. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Trauzettel-Klosinski S, Dietz K. Standardized assessment of reading performance: the new international reading speed texts IReST. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:5452–5461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denton CA, Fletcher JM, Anthony JL, et al. An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. J Learn Disabil. 2006;39:447–466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjeldsen AC, Niemi P, Olofsson Å. Training phonological awareness in kindergarten level children: consistency is more important than quantity. Learn Instruct. 2003;13:349–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alper S, Raharinirina S. Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: a review and synthesis of the literature. J Special Educ Technol. 2006;21:47–64.
   Google Scholar
• Edyburn DL. 2000 in review: a synthesis of the special education technology literature. J Special Educ Technol. 2001;16:5–25.
   Google Scholar
• Ciampa K. Learning in a mobile age: an investigation of student motivation. J Comput Assist Learn. 2014;30:82–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar