This study evaluated the efficacy of using a researcher-developed iPad app that incorporated to 0-5 s constant time delay procedures to improve phonological awareness skills in young English-language learners with disabilities. A multiple probe design across three target phoneme sets and replicated with three students was used to evaluate experimental control. All students mastered their target phonemes and also learned some of the nontarget information (vocabulary) from the vocabulary models provided during instruction. Further, they generalized the skills across materials and maintained the majority of the skills after 3 weeks post-intervention. Findings are discussed with regard to using researcher-developed apps in daily instruction.
AldemireO.GurselO. (2014). The effectiveness of the constant time delay procedure in teaching pre-school academic skills to children with developmental disabilities in a small group teaching arrangement. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14, 733–740.
2.
AppelmanM.VailC. O.Lieberman-BetzR. G. (2014). The effects of constant time delay and instructive feedback on the acquisition of English and Spanish sight words. Journal of Early Intervention, 36, 131–148.
3.
AudS.Wilkinson-FlickerS.KristapovichP.RathbunA.WangX.ZhangJ. (2013). The condition of education 2013 (NCES 2013-037). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
AugustD.ShanahanT. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-minority Children and Youth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
BarkerT.TorgesenJ. K. (1995). An evaluation of computer assisted instruction in phonological awareness with below average readers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 89–103.
7.
BillingsleyE.WhiteO.MunsonR. (1980). Procedural reliability: A rationale and an example. Behavioral Assessment, 2, 229–241.
8.
BlachmanB. A. (2000). Phonological awareness. In KamilM. L.MosenthalP. B.PearsonP. D.BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (vol. III, pp. 483–502). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
BriceR. G.BriceA. E. (2009). Investigation of phonemic awareness and phonic skills in Spanish-English bilingual and English-speaking kindergarten students. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 30, 208–225.
10.
BriskM. E.HarringtonM. M. (2000). Literacy and bilingualism: A handbook for ALL teachers. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
CampbellM. L.MechlingL. C. (2009). Small group computer-assisted instruction with SMART board technology: An investigation of observational and incidental learning of nontarget information. Remedial and Special Education, 30, 47–57.
12.
ChaiZ.VailC. O.AyresK. M. (2015). Using an iPad application to promote early literacy development in young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 48, 268–278.
13.
ChiappeP.SiegelL. S.Wade-WoolleyL. (2002). Linguistic diversity and the development of reading skills: A longitudinal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 6, 369–400.
14.
ConnersF. A.RosenquistC. J.SlighA. C.AtwellJ. A.KiserT. (2006). Phonological reading skills acquisition by children with mental retardation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27, 121–137.
15.
CooperJ.HeronT.HewardW. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
16.
DoyleP. M.WoleryM.GastD. L.AultJ. J.WileyK. (1990). Comparison of constant time delay and the system of least prompts in teaching preschoolers with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 11, 1–22.
17.
DunnL. M.DunnD. M. (2007). Peabody picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessments.
18.
EricksonK. (2005). Literacy and persons with developmental disabilities: Why and how?Paper commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2006, Literacy for Life.
19.
FoormanB. R.TorgesenJ. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, 203–212.
20.
FosterK. C.EricksonG. C.FosterD. F.BrinkmanD.TorgesenJ. K. (1994). Computer administered instruction in phonological awareness: Evaluation of the DaisyQuest program. The Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27, 126–137.
21.
GastD. L.LedfordJ. (2010). Multiple baseline and multiple probe designs. In GastD. L. (Ed.), Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences (pp. 276–328). New York, NY: Routledge.
22.
GastD. L.SpriggsA. D. (2010). Visual analysis of graphic data. In GastD. L. (Ed.), Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences (pp. 199–233). New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
HitchcockC. H.NoonanM. J. (2000). Computer-assisted instruction of early academic skills. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20, 145–158.
24.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, PL 108-466, 20 U. S. C. §1400, H. R. 1350.
25.
KarstenA. M.CarrJ. E. (2009). The effects of differential reinforcement of unprompted responding on the skill acquisition of children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 327–334.
26.
KeelM. C.SlatonD. B.BlackhurstA. E. (2001). Acquisition of content area vocabulary for students with learning disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 46–71.
27.
KennedyE. J.FlynnM. C. (2003). Training phonological awareness skills in children with Down syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 44–57.
28.
LaFranceA.GottardoA. (2005). A longitudinal study of phonological processing skills and reading in bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 559–578.
29.
LeafstedtJ. M.RichardsC. R.GerberM. (2004). Effectiveness of explicit phonological-awareness instruction for at-risk English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19, 252–261.
30.
LedfordJ.GastD. L.LuscreD.AyresK. (2008). Observational and incidental learning by children with autism during small group instruction. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 86–103.
31.
LeeY.VailC. O. (2005). Computer-based reading instruction for young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20, 5–18.
32.
LemonsC.FuchsD. (2009). Phonological awareness of children with Down syndrome: Its role in learning to read and the effectiveness of related interventions. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31, 316–330.
33.
LindseyK. A.ManisF. R.BaileyC. E. (2003). Prediction of first-grade reading in Spanish speaking English-language learners. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 482–494.
34.
LoniganC.PhillipsK.CantorB.AnthonyJ.GoldsteinH. (2003). A computer assisted instruction phonological sensitivity program for preschool children at risk for reading problems. Journal of Early Intervention, 25, 248–262.
35.
MacarusoP.HookP. E.McCabeR. (2006). The efficacy of computer-based supplementary phonics programs for advancing reading skills in at-risk elementary students. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 162–172.
36.
MacarusoP.RodmanA. (2011). Benefits of computer-assisted instruction to support reading acquisition in English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 34, 301–315.
37.
MacarusoP.WalkerA. (2008). The efficacy of computer-assisted instruction for advancing literacy skills in kindergarten children. Reading Psychology, 29, 266–287.
38.
McClannahanL. E.KrantzP. J. (1999). Activity schedule for children with autism: Teaching independent behavior. Bethesda, MD: Woodbine.
39.
MitchellM. J.FoxB. J. (2001). The effects of computer software for developing phonological awareness in low-progress readers. Reading Research and Instruction, 40, 315–332.
40.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (Report of the subgroups). Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
41.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115, §1425, 20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq. (2002).
42.
OlsonR. K.WiseB. W. (1992). Reading on the computer with orthographic and speech feedback: An overview of the Colorado remediation project. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 107–144.
43.
ReidD. K.HreskoW. P.HammillD. D. (2001). Test of early reading ability (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, Inc.
44.
ShanahanT.BeckI. L. (2006). Effective literacy teaching for English-Language Learners. In AugustD.ShanahanT. (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners (pp. 415–488). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45.
SnowC. E.BurnsM. S.GriffinP. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46.
SpoonerF.KnightV. F.BrowderD. M.SmithB. R. (2012). Evidence-based practices for teaching academic skills to students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 374–387.
47.
U.S. Department of Education. (2007). National assessment of educational progress (NAEP): The nation’s report card: Reading 2007, trends in achievement levels by race/ethnicity. Retrieved fromhttp://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/data.asp
48.
van BysterveldtA. K.GillonG. T.MoranC. (2006). Enhancing phonological awareness and letter knowledge in preschool children with Down syndrome. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 53, 301–329.
49.
WiseB. W.RingJ.OlsonR. K. (2000). Individual differences in gains from computer-assisted remedial reading. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77, 197–235.
50.
WiseJ. C.SevcikR. A.RomskiM.MorrisR. D. (2010). The relationship between phonological processing skills and word and nonword identification performance in children with mild intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31, 1170–1175.
51.
WoleryM.AultM. J.DoyleP. M. (1992). Teaching students with moderate and severe disabilities: Use of response prompting strategies. White Plains, NY: Longman.
52.
XinJ. F. (1999). Computer-assisted cooperative learning in integrated classrooms for students with and without disabilities. Information Technology in Childhood Education, 1, 61–78.
