Öğrenme Güçlüğünde Teknoloji Kullanımı Üzerine Sistematik Bir İnceleme

Year 2020, Volume: 21 Issue: 3, 611 - 638, 01.09.2020

Sibel Dogan , Ömer Delialioğlu

https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.563763

Cited By: 7

Abstract

Bu çalışma, öğrenme güçlüğü (ÖG) olan bireyleri desteklemek için
teknolojiyi kullanma konusundaki araştırma çalışmalarının sistematik bir alanyazın
taramasıdır. Çalışmanın amacı; (1) öğrenme güçlüğünde teknoloji kullanımındaki
eğilimleri, (2) kullanılan teknolojilerin öğrencilerin matematik, okuma ve
yazma performanslarını nasıl etkilediği ve (3) öğrencilerin kullanılan
teknolojilere karşı tutumlarını belirlemektir. Bu kapsamda, 56 makaleyi
kapsayan sistematik bir alanyazın taraması ayrıntılı olarak incelenmiştir.
Yapılan derlemenin sonucunda, makalelerin çoğunun 1995-2018 yılları arasında
Amerika Birleşik Devletlerinde (ABD) yayınlandığını göstermiştir. Ayrıca,
yürütülen çalışmalarda genel olarak çoklu ortam tasarımının kullanıldığı ve
katılımcı olarak ise ilkokul öğrencilerinin tercih edildiği belirlenmiştir. İlaveten,
sistematik alanyazın taraması, öğrenme güçlüğünde geliştirilmek istenen becerileri
ve bu becerileri geliştirmek için kullanılan teknolojileri ortaya koymuştur. Bunlara
ek olarak, kullanılan teknolojilerin öğrencilerin performanslarını olumlu yönde
etkilediği ve çğrencilerin kullanılan teknolojilere karşı tutumlarının genel
olarak olumlu olduğu bulunmuştur.

Keywords

yardımcı teknoloji, bilgisayar destekli öğretim, teknoloji, öğrenme güçlüğü, öğrenme zorluğu

A Systematic Review on the Use of Technology in Learning Disabilities

Abstract

This paper is a systematic literature
review of research studies on using technology to support individuals with
Learning Disabilities (LD). The purpose is to determine (1) trends in the use
of technology in LD, (2) the effects of technological tools on reading, writing
and mathematics performances of students’ with LD and (3) LD students’
attitudes toward learning with technology. To provide a holistic view, a
systematic literature review covering 56 articles were examined in detail.
Results showed that the majority of articles were published in the United
States of Amerika between 1995 and 2018. Also, most of these articles preferred
multiple baseline designs and sampled elementary school students. Also, the
review revealed essential skills that need improvement and the technological
tools utilized to enhance these skills. Moreover, results showed that
technological tools positively affect students’ performances and students’
attitudes toward implemented technology was generally positive. 

Keywords

assistive technology, computer-assisted ınstruction, learning disabilities, technology, learning difficulties

References

• APA. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (fifth). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.
• *Belson, S. I., Hartmann, D., & Sherman, J. (2013). Digital note taking: The use of electronic pens with students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28(2), 13–24.
• Blackhurst, A. E. (2005). Perspectives on applications of technology in the field of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 175–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593622
• Bouck, E. C., Bassette, L., Taber-Doughty, T., Flanagan, S. M., & Szwed, K. (2009). Pentop computers as tools for teaching multiplication to students with mild intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44(3), 367–380.
• Brodin, J. (2010). Can ICT give children with disabilities equal opportunities in school? Improving Schools, 13(1), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480209353483
• *Bryant, B. R., Ok, M., Kang, E. Y., Kim, M. K., Lang, R., Bryant, D. P., & Pfannestiel, K. (2015). Performance of fourth-grade students with learning disabilities on multiplication facts comparing teacher-mediated and technology-mediated interventions: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(2), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-015-9218-z
• Butterworth, B., & Laurillard, D. (2010). Low numeracy and dyscalculia: Identification and intervention. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 42(6), 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0267-4
• *Campbell, M. L., & Mechling, L. 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(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508315048
• Chang, Y.-J., Chen, S.-F., & Huang, J.-D. (2011). A Kinect-based system for physical rehabilitation: A pilot study for young adults with motor disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(6), 2566–2570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2011.07.002
• *Ciullo, S., Falcomata, T. S., Pfannenstiel, K., & Billingsley, G. (2015). Improving learning with science and social studies text using computer-based concept maps for students with disabilities. Behavior Modification, 39(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445514552890
• *Corkett, J. K., & Benevides, T. (2016). iPad versus handwriting: Pilot study exploring the writing abilities of students with learning disabilities. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 19(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.9782/JISNE-D-15-00011.1
• *Cullen, J., Keesey, S., Alber-Morgan, S. R., & Wheaton, J. (2013). The effects of computer-assisted instruction using Kurzweil 3000 on sight word acquisition for students with mild disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(2), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0017
• *Cullen, J. M., Alber-Morgan, S. R., Schnell, S. T., & Wheaton, J. E. (2014). Improving the reading skills of students with disabilities using headsprout comprehension. Remedial and Special Education, 35(6), 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514534075
• *Curcic, S. (2011). Addressing the needs of students with learning disabilities during their interaction with the web. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 5(2), 151–170. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216
• Çakıroğlu, O. (2017). Özel öğrenme güçlüğüne giriş. In M. A. Melekoğlu & U. Sak (Eds.), Öğrenme Güçlüğü ve Özel Yetenek (1. Baskı) (pp. 1-22). Pegem Atıf İndeksi.
• *Decker, M. M., & Buggey, T. (2014). Using video self- and peer modeling to facilitate reading fluency in children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 47(2), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412450618
• *Dimitriadi, Y. (2001). Evaluating the use of multimedia authoring with dyslexic learners: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(3), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00197
• *Dolan, R. P., Hall, T. E., Banerjee, M., Chun, E., & Strangman, N. (2005). Applying principles of universal design to test delivery : The effect of computer-based read-aloud on the test performance of high school students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(7). https://doi.org/10.1107/S0909049507037600
• Drigas, A. S., & Ioannidou, R.-E. (2013). Special education and ICTs. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 8(2), 41–47.*Englert, C. S., Wu, X., & Zhao, Y. (2005). Cognitive tools for writing: Scaffolding the performance of students through technology. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(3), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00132.x
• *Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K., Boykin, A., Good, K., Hughes, M., MacVittie, N., … Chirinos, D. (2016). Emphasizing planning for essay writing with a computer-based graphic organizer. Exceptional Children, 82(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915591697
• *Floyd, K. K., & Judge, S. L. (2012). The efficacy of assistive technology on reading comprehension for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 8(1), 48–64.
• *Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C. L., Powell, S. R., Capizzi, A. M., & Seethaler, P. M. (2006). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on number combination skill in at-risk first graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390050701
• *Gentry, J. E., & Lindsey, P. (2008). The impact of assistive technology on vocabulary acquisition of a middle school student with learning disabilities and limited English proficiency: A descriptive case study analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 63–93.
• *Hall, T. E., Cohen, N., Vue, G., & Ganley, P. (2015). Addressing learning disabilities with UDL and technology: Strategic reader. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(2), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714544375
• *Hetzroni, O. E., & Shrieber, B. (2004). Word processing as an assistive technology tool for enhancing academic outcomes of students with writing disabilities in the general classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370020501
• *Higgins, E. L., & Raskind, M. H. (1995). Compensatory effectiveness of speech recognition on the written composition performance of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511202
• *Higgins, E. L., & Raskind, M. H. (2000). Speaking to read: The effects of continuous vs. discrete speech recognition systems on the reading and spelling of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340001500102
• *Huscroft-D’Angelo, J., Higgins, K. N., & Crawford, L. L. (2014). A Descriptive Study Examining the Impact of Digital Writing Environments on Communication and Mathematical Reasoning for Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(4), 177–188. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2014-V20-I4-6146
• IDEA. (2004). Individuals with disabilities education improvement act.
• *Irish, C. (2002). Using peg- and keyword mnemonics and computer-assisted instruction to enhance basic multiplication performance in elementary students with learning and cognitive disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 29–40.
• Jones, A., Issroff, K., & Scanlon, E. (2006). Affective factors in learning with mobile devices. In M. Sharples (Ed.), Big Issues in Mobile Learning. Report of a workshop by the Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence Mobile Learning Initiative. (p. 36). Learning Sciences Research Institute. University of Nottingham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7
• *Kennedy, M. J., Deshler, D. D., & Lloyd, J. W. (2015). Effects of multimedia vocabulary instruction on adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413487406
• *Kennedy, M. J., Thomas, C. N., Meyer, J. P., Alves, K. D., & Lloyd, J. W. (2014). Using evidence-based multimedia to improve vocabulary performance of adolescents with LD: A UDL approach. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(2), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948713507262
• *Keyes, S. E., Cartledge, G., Gibson Jr., L., & Robinson-Ervin, P. (2016). Programming for generalization of oral reading fluency using computer-assisted instruction and changing fluency criteria. Education and Treatment of Children, 39(2), 141–172. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2016.0011
• King-Sears, M. E., & Evmenova, A. S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for integrating technology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 6–14.
• *Klemes, J., Epstein, A., Zuker, M., Grinberg, N., & Ilovitch, T. (2006). An assistive computerized learning students with learning disabilities An assistive computerized learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 21(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680510500468062
• Koscinski, S. T., & Gast, D. L. (1993). Computer-assisted instruction with constant time delay to teach multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 8(3), 157–168.
• *Lange, A. A., Mulhern, G., & Wylie, J. (2009). Proofreading using an assistive software homophone tool: Compensatory and Remedial Effects on the literacy skills of students with reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(4), 322–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408331035
• *Leh, J. M., & Jitendra, A. K. (2013). Effects of computer-mediated versus teacher-mediated instruction on the mathematical word problem-solving performance of third-grade students with mathematical difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36(2), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948712461447
• Lin, Y.-L., Chen, M.-C., Wu, T.-F., & Yeh, Y.-M. (2008). The effectiveness of a pedagogical agent-based learning system for teaching word recognition to children with moderate mental retardation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 715–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00747.x
• Lyon, G. R., Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2003). Defining dyslexia, comorbidity, teachers’ knowledge of language and reading: A definition of dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-003-0001-9
• *Meyer, N. K., & Bouck, E. C. (2014). The Impact of Text-to-Speech on Expository Reading for Adolescents with LD. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900102
• Mohammed, A. A., & Kanpolat, Y. E. (2010). Effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction on enhancing the classification skill in second-graders at risk for learning disabilities. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 8(3), 1115–1130.
• MoNE. (2010). Okullarımızda neden nasıl niçin kaynaştırma (1st ed.). Ankara.
• *Mutlu, Y., & Akgün, L. (2017). The effects of computer-assisted instruction materials on approximate number skills of students with dyscalculia. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2), 119–136.
• NASET. (2005). Characteristics of children with learning disabilities. National Association of Special Education Teachers LD Report. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2011.534912
• *Nelson, L. M., & Reynolds, T. W. (2015). Speech recognition, disability, and college composition. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 28(2), 181–197.
• *Niedo, J., Lee, Y.-L., Breznitz, Z., & Berninger, V. W. (2014). Computerized silent reading rate and strategy instruction for fourth graders at risk in silent reading rate. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948713507263
• N.J.C.L.D (1991). Learning disabilities: Issues on definition. Asha, 33(5), 18–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2012.08.001
• *Nordness, P. D., Haverkost, A., & Volberding, A. (2011). An examination of hand-held computer-assisted instruction on subtraction skills for second grade students with learning and behavioral disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 26(4), 15–24.
• *Papadima-Sophocleous, S., & Charalambous, M. (2014). Impact of ipod touch-supported repeated reading on the english oral reading fluency of L2 students with specific learning difficulties. The EUROCALL Review, 22(1), 47–58.
• Price, G. R., & Ansari, D. (2013). Dyscalculia : Characteristics , causes, and treatments. Numeracy, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.5038/1936-4660.6.1.2
• *Raskind, M. H., & Higgins, E. L. (1999). Speaking to Read: The effects of Speech Recognition Technology on the Reading and Spelling Performance of Children with Learning Disabilities. Annals of Dyslexia, 49, 251–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-999-0026-9
• *Regan, K., Berkeley, S., Hughes, M., & Kirby, S. (2014). Effects of computer-assisted instruction for struggling elementary readers with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 48(2), 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913497261
• Rwey-Lin, S., Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., & Mushinski Fulk, B. J. (1994). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematical problem solving of students with learning disabilities. Exceptionality, 5(3), 131–161. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327035ex0503_5
• *Satsangi, R., & Bouck, E. C. (2015). Using virtual manipulative instruction to teach the concepts of area and perimeter to secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(3), 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714550101
• *Satsangi, R., Bouck, E. C., Taber-Doughty, T., Bofferding, L., & Roberts, C. A. (2016). Comparing the effectiveness of virtual and concrete manipulatives to teach algebra to secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(4), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948716649754
• *Scheeler, M. C., Macluckie, M., & Albright, K. (2010). Effects of immediate feedback delivered by peer tutors on the oral presentation skills of adolescents with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 31(2), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327458
• *Seo, Y.-J., & Bryant, D. (2012). Multimedia CAI program for students with mathematics difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 33(4), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510383322
• *Seo, Y.-J., & Woo, H. (2010). The identification, implementation, and evaluation of critical user interface design features of computer-assisted instruction programs in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Computers and Education, 55(1), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.002Sharma, D., & Madhumita, A. (2012). Availability and attitude of using assistive technology for students with disabilities. Indian Streams Research Journal, 2(9), 1–8.
• Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2005). Dyslexia (specific reading disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1301–1309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.01.043
• *Shin, M., & Bryant, D. P. (2017). Improving the fraction word problem solving of students with mathematics learning disabilities: Interactive computer application. Remedial and Special Education, 38(2), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516669052
• *Silió, M. C., & Barbetta, P. M. (2010). The effects of word prediction and text-to-speech technologies on the narrative writing skills of hispanic students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(4), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341002500402
• *Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2006). Access and benefits: Assistive technology in adult literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 50(2), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.50.2.4
• *Skiada, R., Soroniati, E., Gardeli, A., & Zissis, D. (2014). EasyLexia 2.0: Redesigning our mobile application for children with learning difficulties. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 7(2), 119–135.
• *Stetter, M. E., & Hughes, M. T. (2011). Computer assisted instruction to promote comprehension in students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 26(1), 88–100.
• *Stultz, S. L. (2013). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction for teaching mathematics to students with specific learning disability. The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 2(2), 7.
• *Tanners, A., McDougall, D., Skouge, J., & Narkon, D. (2012). Comprehension and time expended for a doctoral student with a learning disability when reading with and without an accommodation. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(1), 3–10.
• *Tariq, R., & Latif, S. (2016). A mobile application to improve learning performance of dyslexic children with writing difficulties. Educational Technology & Society, 19(4), 151–166.
• Topbaş, S. (1997). Öğrenme güçlüğü gözlenenler. In Özel eğitim (pp. 54–64).
• Turkey Istatistic Institution (2002). Özürlülük Oranı. Offical Website. Retrieved December, 2017 from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1017
• *Twyman, T., & Tindal, G. (2006). Using a computer-adapted , conceptually based history text to increase comprehension and problem-solving skills of students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5–16.
• U.S. Department of Education. (2016). 38th annual report to congress on the implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act.Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities? The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669030370030301
• *Wade, E., Boon, R. T., & Spencer, V. G. (2010). Use of Kidspiration© software to enhance the reading comprehension of story grammar components for elementary-age students with specific learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8(2), 31–41.
• *White, D. H., & Robertson, L. (2015). Implementing assistive technologies: A study on co-learning in the Canadian elementary school context. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1268–1275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.003
• *Williams, S. C. (2002). How speech-feedback and word-predition software can help students write. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(3), 72–78.
• Wiznitzer, M., & Scheffel, D. L. (2009). Learning disabilities. In R. B. David (Ed.), Clinical pediatric neurology (Third). Demos Medical.
• World Health Organization official web site (2015). Disabilities and Rehabilitation. Retrieved December, 2017 from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs352/en/
• *Xin, J. F., & Rieth, H. (2001). Video-assisted vocabulary instruction for elementary school students with learning disabilities. Information Technology in Childhood Education, 1, 87–103.
• *Xin, Y. P., Tzur, R., Hord, C., Liu, J., Park, J. Y., & Si, L. (2017). An intelligent tutor-assisted mathematics intervention program for students with learning difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 40(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948716648740
• *Zhang, Y. (2000). Technology and the writing skills of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(4), 467–478. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijigsp.2012.01.06