Reading Technology In An Adult Aboriginal Population

1
Reading Technology In An Adult Aboriginal
Population Does One Size Fit All?

• Northern Ontario Assessment and Resource Centre
• Alana Holmes, Ph.D., C.Psych
• Robert Silvestri M.Ed., Ph.D. candidate

2
Project Funding

• Aboriginal Education Office in association with
• Ministry of Education
• Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities

3
Rationale for Study

• Canadian Institutes of Health Report Literacy
  and Health in Canada Aboriginal peoples in
  Canada have lower reading literacy scores than
  non-Aboriginal Canadians
• 1988 needs survey by MChigeeng First Nation
  critical to establish a community based literacy
  program due to high rate of residents without a
  high school diploma

4
Rationale for Study

• Elkind, Black, and Murray (1996) in a study of
  adults with reading disabilities demonstrated
  enhanced performance in reading speed and reading
  endurance when using text reading software as
  compared to reading unaided.
• Higgins and Raskind (1997) in a study of
  post-secondary students with dyslexia found that
  disabled readers improved reading comprehension
  scores when utilizing text reading software.

5
Methodological Shortcomings

• An exhaustive literature search revealed that
  there is a dearth of studies investigating the
  effects of text reading software on reading
  skills in Aboriginal populations.

6
Research Questions

• Examine the efficacy of text-to-voice technology
  on reading comprehension performance in an
  Aboriginal population with self-reported reading
  difficulties.
• Identify the cognitive correlates associated with
  improved reading comprehension utilizing reading
  technology for an Aboriginal population with
  self-reported reading difficulties.

7
Research Sample

• 38 Aboriginal participants with self-identified
  reading difficulties
• Wikwemikong First Nation n 31, MChigeeng First
  Nation (West Bay) n 7
• Mean age 30.05 years (SD 12.02)
• Mean grade level completed 10.66 (SD 1.83)
• Sex Ratio 22 males, 16 females

8
Procedures

• Each participant completed a variety of cognitive
  and reading assessments.
• Participants received a training session using
  assistive reading technology (proficiency with
  software controlled)
• Counterbalanced format all participants
  completed reading comprehension pre and post
  testing with and without the use of assistive
  technology.

9
Measurements

• Questionnaires
• Adult Reading History Questionnaire Revised
  (Parrila, Corkett, Kirby, Hein, 2003).
• Author Recognition Test (West, Stanovich,
  Mitchell, 1993).
• Computer Attitude Questionnaire (Knezek
  Miyashita, 1993).

10
Adult Reading History Questionnaire Revised
(ARHQ-R)
11
Author Recognition Test

• Abbreviated Author Recognition Test
•  
• Instructions Below you will see a list of 25
  names. Some of the people in the list are popular
  writers (of books, magazine articles, and/or
  newspaper columns) and some are not. Please read
  the names and circle those individuals who you
  know to be writers. Do not guess, only circle
  those who you know are authors.
•  
•  
• Isaac Asimov
  Robert Tierney
• Isabel Beck
  J.R.R. Tolkien
•  
• P.E. Bryant
  Richard Venezky
•  
• Barbara Cartland
  Irving Wallace
•  
• James Clavell
  Joseph Wambaugh
•  
• Gerald Duffy
  Bob Woodward
•  
• Ian Fleming
•  

12
Computer Attitude Questionnaire
13
Measurements

• Cognitive Measures
• WAIS-3 (all subtests except Object Assembly)
• TOWRE Phonemic Decoding and Sight Word
  Efficiency
• C-TOPP core subtests
• WIAT word reading, reading comprehension, and
  pseudoword decoding
• Nelson Denny Reading Comprehension Test Form G
  and H comprehension tests

14
Research Findings

• Self perception of reading history difficulty in
  elementary and secondary school accurately
  discriminated performance on standardized
  measures of reading

15
Table 5. Adult Reading History Questionnaire -
Revised Secondary School Groups and Reading
Measures Standard Scores
Phonological Processing Phonological Processing Phonological Processing Word Recognition Word Recognition
ARHQ-R Secondary School Groups C-TOPP Phonological Awareness Composite WIAT Pseudoword Decoding TOWRE Phonemic Decoding Efficiency WIAT Word Reading TOWRE Sight Word Efficiency
Less Problematic Reading History 106 104 95 100 93
Significant Reading History Difficulties 82 84 84 82 84
Very Significant Reading History Difficulties 73 73 66 64 67
Note ARHQ-R Adult Reading History
Questionnaire Revised C-TOPP Comprehensive
Test of Phonological Processing WIAT Wechsler
Individual Achievement Test TOWRE Test of Word
Reading Efficiency significant at the 0.01
level (two-tailed) significant at the 0.05
level (two-tailed)
16
Table 5. Adult Reading History Questionnaire -
Revised Secondary School Groups and Reading
Measures Standard Scores
Rapid Naming Phonological Memory Reading Comprehension
ARHQ-R Secondary School Groups C-TOPP Rapid Naming Composite (n.s.) C-TOPP Phonological Memory Composite Nelson Denny Reading Comprehension Percentile
Less Problematic Reading History 106 97 54th
Significant Reading History Difficulties 91 88 36th
Very Significant Reading History Difficulties 97 70 25th
Note ARHQ-R Adult Reading History
Questionnaire Revised C-TOPP Comprehensive
Test of Phonological Processing WIAT Wechsler
Individual Achievement Test TOWRE Test of Word
Reading Efficiency significant at the 0.01
level (two-tailed) significant at the 0.05
level (two-tailed) n.s. non-significant
17
Research Findings

• Overall, participants provided more correct
  answers and attempted more questions on the
  comprehension component of the ND when reading
  without assistive technology number of incorrect
  answers remained constant when reading with and
  without assistive technology
• confounds lack of computer experience ,
  computer anxiety, reading exposure (ART),
  automaticity concerns ( e.g., processing speed).
• significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
  0.05 level (two-tailed)
• ND Comprehension Correct Answers
• M 13.97 without technology vs. M 10.58 with
  technology p lt.01
• ND Comprehension Attempts
• M 22.47 without technology vs. M 18.97 with
  technology p.lt01

18
Research Findings

• 3. Students with a given set of cognitive
  characteristics, poor performance on non-word
  repetition and rapid naming tasks, demonstrated
  improvements in comprehension on the Nelson Denny
  when using assistive technology

19
Nonword Repetition groups and Nelson Denny
Comprehension Performance
Low Group (below the mean) High Group (above the mean)
Answered more questions correctly with technology (M 7.25 with technology vs. M 4.25 without technology p lt.01 Answered more questions correctly without technology (M 9.00 with technology vs. M 14.57 without technology p lt .01
Attempted more questions with technology (M 18.00 attempts with technology vs. M 12.00 without technology p .13) Attempted more questions without technology (M 16.43 with technology vs. M 23.57 without technology p .02)
Higher reading comprehension percentile with technology (M 9th with technology vs. M 2nd without technology p .01 Higher reading comprehension percentile without technology (M 17th with technology vs. M 38th without technology p lt.01
20
Regression Analysis of Correct Answers on Nelson
Denny Comprehension Test utilizing Assistive
Technology
Predictors Significance Zero Order Correlation Partial Correlation
Verbal Comprehension Index .05 .57 .35
Working Memory Index .01 .53 .44
CTOPP Memory for Digits .01 .51 .51
CTOPP Blending Words .01 -.06 -.71
TOWRE Sight Word .08 .61 .32
Multiple Correlation Coefficient .86
21
Regression Analysis of CTOPP Nonword Repetition
Performance
Predictor Significance Zero Order Correlation Partial Correlation
Verbal Comprehension Index .01 .53 .45
Processing Speed Index .01 -.19 -.52
CTOP Phoneme Elision .01 .24 -.46
CTOPP Blending Words .02 .42 .43
WIAT Pseudoword .01 .56 .51
Multiple Correlation Coefficient . 79
22
Significance of Nonword Repetition to Reading
Comprehension utilizing AT

• Assesses many of the underlying skills associated
  with utilizing assistive technology for reading
  comprehension.
• Sound Perception acoustic quality and
  phonotactic frequency (Coady et al., 2005, 2007)
• Phonological Awareness and Processing
  processing of phonemes (Bowery, 1996)
• Phonological Memory the ability the store
  phonological units (i.e., phonemes) associated
  with depth of vocabulary (verbal comprehension)

23
Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1999) and Nonword
Repetition Performance
Poor NWR performance
Good NWR performance
Deficits in processing mechanisms underlying NWR
Have prerequisite NWR skills
Congruent with AT instructional format
Incongruent with AT instructional format
AT - Highly structured, word-by-word reading
format
Intrinsic processing instructional format
germane cognitive load (reading comp. gains)
Intrinsic processing instructional format
high cognitive load (expertise reversal effect)
24
Applications/Future Research

1. ARHQ-R predicted general reading difficulties in
   the sampled population it holds merit as a
   screening tool to discern reading problems in
   Aboriginal adults.
2. Examining students phonological processing
   profiles prior to assigning reading technology
   may be a useful practice if similar results are
   found in a larger research sample.
3. Future studies follow-up study with participants
   utilizing technology for a longer period of time.

25
Contact Information

• Alana Holmes, Ph.D., C.Psych. [phone]
  alana.holmes_at_cambriancollege.ca
• Robert Silvestri, M.Ed., Ph.D., candidate - (705)
  524-7397 robert.silvestri_at_cambriancollege.ca

26
Research Disclaimer

• The results obtained in this study are
  preliminary as they were obtained with a small
  number of research participants. These results
  need to be replicated with larger, heterogeneous
  groups before implementation into disability
  services or clinical practice.