Information and communication technology (ICT)-based reading interventions have potential to help children with reading difficulties, especially those in resource-constrained environments who otherwise might not have access to support. This pilot study aimed to describe the impact of an online, partner-supported reading intervention designed for South African children with reading difficulties. Objectives were to qualitatively describe participants’ experience of the intervention, and quantitatively evaluate changes in reading accuracy, rate, comprehension and receptive vocabulary after intervention. Two studies were conducted: (1) A retrospective analysis using data from intervention in mainstream Cape Town schools with peers as reading partners; (2) A prospective study in a Cape Town school with special needs educational provision where speech-language therapists served as reading partners. Both studies used matched participant, pre/post intervention designs. A total of 40 children in grades 3 to 6 participated. In each study the intervention group (n = 20) received intervention 3 times per week (30 minutes per session) for 10 weeks, while the control group (n = 20) continued with regular school activities. Participants enjoyed the ICT-based intervention, valued the role of the reading partners, believed they had made literacy gains, and reported positive attitudinal and behavioural changes related to reading. Retrospective analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups. The prospective study found a statistically significant difference between the intervention and control groups’ gains on one measure of reading rate, but no significant difference in reading accuracy, vocabulary or reading comprehension gains. The study provides a preliminary description of one ICT-based reading intervention. Although an intervention effect could not be demonstrated, the changes noted in reading rate together with qualitative findings suggest a need for further research.
AbramiPCWadeCALysenkoLMarshJGiokoA (2016) Using educational technology to develop early literacy skills in Sub-Saharan Africa. Education and Information Technologies21: 945–64.
2.
BoyleJMcCartneyEForbesJO’HareA (2007) A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of direct versus indirect and individual versus group modes of speech and language therapy for children with primary language impairment. Health Technology Assessment11(25).
3.
BraunCClarkeV (2014) Thematic analysis. In: CooperH (ed.) APA handbook of research methods in psychology: Research designs: Volume 2. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 57–71.
CampuzanoLDynarskiMAgodiniRRallK (2009) Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from two student cohorts. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
6.
ChambersBSlavinREMaddenNA, et al. (2011) Small-group, computer-assisted tutoring to improve reading outcomes for struggling first and second graders. The Elementary School Journal111: 625–40.
7.
CheungACSlavinRE (2011) The effectiveness of education technology for enhancing reading achievement: A meta-analysis. Baltimore, MD: Center for Research and Reform in Education.
8.
CheungACSlavinRE (2013) Effects of educational technology applications on reading outcomes for struggling readers: A best evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly48: 277–99.
9.
CirrinFMSchoolingTLNelsonNW, et al. (2010) Evidence-based systematic review: Effects of different service delivery models on communication outcomes for elementary school-age children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools41: 233–64.
10.
Department of Basic Education (2014) Report on the Annual National Assessments 2014. Pretoria: Government Printing Works.
11.
DuffFJClarkePJ (2011) Practitioner review: Reading disorders: What are the effective interventions and how should they be implemented and evaluated?Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry52: 3–12.
12.
DufreneBAReisenerCDOlmiDJ, et al. (2010) Peer tutoring for reading fluency as a feasible and effective alternative in response to intervention systems. Journal of Behavioral Education19: 239–56.
13.
DunnLMWhettonCBurleyJ (1997) The British picture vocabulary scale. Windsor: National Foundation for Educational Research.
14.
DynarskiMAgodiniRHeavisideS, et al. (2007) Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products findings from the first student cohort. Collingdale, PA: Diane Publishing.
15.
GaluschkaKIseEKrickKSchulte-KörneG (2014) Effectiveness of treatment approaches for children and adolescents with reading disabilities: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLOS One9: 1–12.
16.
GravesMF (2016) The vocabulary book: Learning and instruction. New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
HowieSCombrinckCRouxK, et al. (2017) PIRLS 2016. Pretoria: Centre for Evaluation and Assessment.
18.
JamshidifarsaniHGarbayaSLimTBlazevicPRitchieJM (2019) Technology-based reading intervention programs for elementary grades: An analytical review. Computers and Education128: 427–51.
19.
Jere-FolotiyaJChansa-KabaliTMunachakaJC, et al. (2014) The effect of using a mobile literacy game to improve literacy levels of grade one students in Zambian schools. Educational Technology Research and Development62: 417–36.
20.
LindebladENilssonSGustafsonSSvenssonI (2016) Assistive technology as reading interventions for children with reading impairments with a one-year follow-up. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology12: 713–24.
21.
LysenkoLVAbramiPC (2014) Promoting reading comprehension with the use of technology. Computers and Education75: 162–72.
22.
LysenkoLAbramiPCWadeCA, et al. (2019) Promoting young Kenyans’ growth in literacy with educational technology: A tale of two years of implementation. International Journal of Educational Research95: 176–89.
23.
MaddenNSlavinR (2017) Evaluations of technology-assisted small-group tutoring for struggling readers. Reading and Writing Quarterly33: 327–34.
24.
MakBSCheungACGuoXAbramiPCWadeA (2017) Examining the impact of the ABRACADABRA (ABRA) web-based literacy program on primary school students in Hong Kong. Education and Information Technologies22: 2671–91.
25.
MathesPGTorgesenJKClancy-MenchettiJ, et al. (2003) A comparison of teacher-directed versus peer-assisted instruction to struggling first-grade readers. The Elementary School Journal103: 459–79.
26.
McGeownSPJohnstonRSWalkerJ, et al. (2015) The relationship between young children’s enjoyment of learning to read, reading attitudes, confidence and attainment. Educational Research57: 389–402.
27.
McTigueEMUppstadPH (2019) Getting serious about serious games: Best practices for computer games in reading classrooms. The Reading Teacher72: 453–61.
28.
McTigueEMSolheimOJZimmerWKUppstadPH (2019) Critically reviewing GraphoGame across the world: Recommendations and cautions for research and implementation of computer-assisted instruction for word-reading acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly55: 45–73.
29.
MiracleSACollinsBCSchusterJWGrisham-BrownJ (2001) Peer-delivered versus teacher-delivered instruction: Effects on acquisition and maintenance. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities36: 375–85.
30.
MizeMBryantDPBryantBR (2019) Teaching reading to students with learning disabilities: Effects of combined iPad-assisted and peer-assisted instruction on oral reading fluency performance. Assistive Technology32: 317–24.
31.
MizeMParkYSchramm-PossingerMColemanMB (2020) Developing a rubric for evaluating reading applications for learners with reading difficulties. Intervention in School and Clinic55: 145–53.
32.
MoranJFerdigREPearsonPDWardropJBlomeyerRLJr. (2008) Technology and reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy and practice. Journal of Literacy Research40: 6–58.
33.
MullisIMartinMFoyPHooperM (2017) PIRLS 2016 international results in reading. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
34.
Nadler-NirEPascoeM (2016) Language-based literacy interventions: Innovative practice in South Africa. In: PeerLReidG (eds) Multilingualism, literacy and dyslexia. 2nd edition.Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 89–103.
35.
Nadler-NirEPeerLPascoeM (2016) Intensive, targeted, multi-modal language-based literacy intervention. Unpublished paper presented at the British Dyslexia Association conference, Oxford, UK.
36.
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. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
37.
NgoroshoD (2018) Enhancing the acquisition of basic reading skills in Kiswahili using GraphoGame. Papers in Education and Development35: 1–26.
38.
PascoeMKlopDMdlaloTNdhambiM (2018) Beyond lip service: Towards human rights- driven guidelines for South African speech-language pathologists. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology20: 67–74.
39.
PascoeMNadler-NirELe RouxJPattersonJ (2017) The Virtual Reading Gym: Towards an evidence-based online intervention for South African children with reading difficulties. Unpublished paper presented at South African Speech-Language-Hearing Association conference, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
40.
PatelPTorppaMAroMRichardsonULyytinenH (2018) GraphoLearn India: The effectiveness of a computer-assisted reading intervention in supporting struggling readers of English. Frontiers in Psychology9: 1–14.
41.
ShannonLCStyersMKWilkersonSBPeeryE (2015) Computer-assisted learning in elementary reading: A randomized control trial. Computers in the Schools32: 20–34.
42.
SpaullN (2013) South Africa’s education crisis: The quality of education in South Africa 1994- 2011. Report Commissioned by Centre for Development and Enterprise, Johannesburg.
StevensEAWalkerMAVaughnS (2017) The effects of reading fluency interventions on the reading fluency and reading comprehension performance of elementary students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the research from 2001 to 2014. Journal of Learning Disabilities50: 576–90.
45.
StorkelHLVoelmleKFierroV, et al. (2017) Interactive book reading to accelerate word learning by kindergarten children with specific language impairment: Identifying an adequate intensity and variation in treatment response. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools48: 16–30.
46.
SugdenEBakerEWilliamsALMunroNTrivetteCM (2020) Evaluation of parent-delivered and speech-language-pathologist-delivered multiple oppositions intervention for children with phonological impairment: A multiple-baseline design study. American Journal of Speech- Language Pathology29: 111–26.
47.
TaylorSvon FintelM (2016) Estimating the impact of language of instruction in South African primary schools: A fixed effects approach. Economics of Education Review50: 75–89.
48.
TorgesenJK (2000) Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice1: 55–64.
49.
UkrainetzTA (2017) Commentary on ‘Reading comprehension is not a single ability’: Implications for child language intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools48: 92–97.
WolfMMillerLDonnellyK (2000) Retrieval, automaticity, vocabulary elaboration, orthography (RAVE-O) a comprehensive, fluency-based reading intervention program. Journal of Learning Disabilities33: 375–86.
55.
WoodCLMustianALLoYY (2013) Effects of supplemental computer-assisted reciprocal peer tutoring on kindergarteners’ phoneme segmentation fluency. Education and Treatment of Children36: 33–48.
