Using an iPad Application to Promote Early Literacy Development in Young Children With Disabilities

Abstract

This investigation evaluated the effects of using an iPad application to teach young children with developmental delays to receptively identify initial phonemes through 0-to 5-s constant time delay procedures in the context of a multiple-probe design across three sets of behaviors and replicated across three students. The dependent variable was the percentage of unprompted correct receptive identification responses for target phonemes during instruction and probes. All students mastered their target phonemes, generalized the skills across materials, and maintained the skills at or above 50% of accuracy 4 and 7 weeks after the intervention was completed. This study expands the knowledge on using touch screen iPad application for early literacy instruction of young children with disabilities.

Improving Learning Outcomes: The iPad and Preschool Children with Disabilities

“…After a post-test on alphabet knowledge, matching, and number concepts, they reported that use of the iPad-supported learning in the areas of alphabet knowledge and number concepts. Zhen et al (2015) looked at the effects of using an iPad application to teach four young children with disabilities to identify initial phonemes and found that performance was improved and the children enjoyed using the iPad. Chmiliar (2013, 2014), in a series of two pilot studies with preschool children with disabilities, found that young children between the ages of three to five were able to successfully learn to navigate the iPad.…”

The quality of evidence in tablet‐assisted interventions for students with disabilities

“…First, all 14 studies received 3‐point scores for the first sub‐category (participant description) by providing an operational definition of the participants' disabilities and details such as age, gender and IQ. For the second sub‐category (participant selection), only six studies (Burton et al, ; Chai et al, ; Creech‐Galloway et al, ; Rivera et al, ; Seok et al, ; Spooner et al, ) received 2‐point or 3‐point scores by describing criteria for selecting participants along with reading pre‐assessment data; the other eight studies received 1‐point scores mostly because they lacked data from reading pre‐assessments. With regard to the third sub‐category, setting description, ten studies received 3‐point scores; two studies received 2‐point scores because they provided some features of setting but needed more details such as type of classroom, room arrangement and number of students per teacher.…”

“…For example, in a study to examine the effects of iPod‐assisted instruction on job‐related tasks (Kellems & Morningstar, ), informal interview data with 16‐ to 22‐year‐old students with autism spectrum disorders revealed that, in addition to the usefulness of the devices in completing the task, the students expressed enjoyment, willingness to participate in the task and a positive preference for using an iPod for future work. Similarly, informal interview data in a study by Chai, Vail and Ayres () showed that all K‐2 students with disabilities enjoyed using the touch sound in an iPad application when they were asked to respond during constant time delay session procedures for matching initial phonemes (e.g., choosing the same beginning sound).…”

“…Each of these studies was further reviewed to determine if it fully meets the criteria. Upon the completion of this process, 17 intervention studies were identified for inclusion in this review: three quasi‐experimental/experimental design studies (Berninger, Nagy, Tanimoto, Thompson, & Abbott, ; Liu, Chou, Liu, & Yang, ; Zhang, Trussell, Gallegos, & Asam, ) and 14 single‐case design studies (Arthanat, Curtin, & Knotak, ; Burton et al, ; Chai et al, ; Creech‐Galloway, Collins, Knight, & Bausch, ; Crowley, McLaughlin, & Kahn, ; Ganz et al, ; Hart & Whalon, ; Musti‐Rao, Lo, & Plati, ; Purrazzella & Mechling, ; Retter, Anderson, & Kieran, ; Rivera, Mason, Moser, & Ahlgrim‐Delzell, ; Seok, DaCosta, & Yu, ; Spooner, Ahlgrim‐Delzell, Kemp‐Inman, & Wood, ; van der Meer et al, ).…”

An exploration of teacher's use of iPads for students with learning support needs

“…The iPad has been shown to: increase the academic engagement of students who have language-based disabilities (Cumming and Draper Rodriguez, 2013); increase time on task of elementary-level students who experience challenging behaviour during independent academic activities (Flower, 2014); support students with support communication skills in English Language Learners (Demski, 2011); promote literacy and social goals in students with multiple and complex needs by providing an multi-modal method of developing and sharing personal stories (Kucirkova, Messer, Critten, et al, 2014); teach young children with developmental delays to receptively identify initial phonemes, a foundational early literacy skill (Chai, Vail and Ayres, 2015); and offer modelling for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and developmental disabilities (Burton, Anderson, Prater, et al, 2013;Hammond, Whatley, Ayres, et al, 2010).…”