This article was downloaded by: [University of Western Ontario]On: 14 November 2014, At: 02:52Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Open Learning: The Journal of Open,Distance and e-LearningPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/copl20

An assistive computerized learningenvironment for distance learningstudents with learning disabilitiesJoel Klemes a , Alit Epstein a , Michal Zuker a , Nira Grinberg a &Tamar Ilovitch aa The Open University of Israel , IsraelPublished online: 23 Jan 2007.

To cite this article: Joel Klemes , Alit Epstein , Michal Zuker , Nira Grinberg & Tamar Ilovitch(2006) An assistive computerized learning environment for distance learning students with learningdisabilities, Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 21:1, 19-32

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680510500468062

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Open LearningVol. 21, No. 1, February 2006, pp. 19–32

ISSN 0268–0513 (print)/ISSN 1469–9958 (online)/06/010019–14© 2006 The Open UniversityDOI: 10.1080/02680510500468062

An assistive computerized learning environment for distance learning students with learning disabilitiesJoel Klemes*, Alit Epstein, Michal Zuker, Nira Grinberg and Tamar IlovitchThe Open University of Israel, IsraelTaylor and Francis LtdCOPL_A_146789.sgm10.1080/02680510500468062Open Learning0268-0513 (print)/1469-9958 (online)Original Article2006Taylor & Francis211000000February 2006JoelKlemesjoelkl@openu.ac.il

The current study examines how a computerized learning environment assists students with learn-ing disabilities (LD) enrolled in a distance learning course at the Open University of Israel. Thetechnology provides computer display of the text, synchronized with auditory output and accompa-nied by additional computerized study skill tools which support learning. Since the technology isnot based on language-specific synthetic voice output, it can be operated in any language. Theresults of the study suggest that the assistive technology tested in this study is highly beneficial tostudents with LD who are studying from a distance. The prospects of its implementation forstudents with LD in distance learning academic institutions, at a time when their number in theseinstitutions is increasing, are discussed.

Keywords: Computerized learning environment; Distance learning; Learning disability; Text-to-speech

Introduction

According to most definitions, learning disabilities (LD) are a group of disorders thataffect the ability to acquire or use listening, speaking, concentrating, reading, writ-ing, reasoning or math skills (Gerber & Reiff, 1994; National Institute for Literacy,1995). In the second half of the twentieth century, and particularly during the 1990s,special attention and efforts were devoted to research and treatment relating to chil-dren and adults with one or more of these disabilities. During this period, remarkableadvances were also made in the field of digital technology. As a consequence of therecruitment of new technology to LD research and treatment, a body of evidence was

*Corresponding author. The Open University of Israel, 108 Ravutski Street, PO Box 808, Raanana,Israel 43107. Email: joelkl@openu.ac.il

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

20 J. Klemes et al.

accumulated during this time that indicated that assistive technologies, primarily inthe areas of computer hardware and software, can help students overcome variouskinds and degrees of LD, and provide new opportunities for this population (Elkindet al., 1996; Day & Edwards, 1996; Elkind, 1998; Lewis, 1998; Raskind & Higgins,1998; Lewis, 2000; Maccini et al., 2002; Mull & Sitlington, 2003). The increasedavailability of computers and other assistive technologies, coupled with new legisla-tion related to students with LD in the UK, the US and elsewhere (Day & Edwards,1996; Bryant & Seay, 1998; Raskind & Higgins, 1998) has had a remarkable effecton the number of students with LD in institutions of higher education. For example,between 1988 and 2000, the percentage of students with learning disabilities amongstudents with any disability enrolled in US colleges more than doubled, and reached40% (Henderson, 2001).

Other developments which occurred during the second half of the twentiethcentury were the rapid increase in the number of academic distance learning institu-tions, as well as the tendency to replace face-to-face lectures in colleges, universitiesand corporate training with distance learning courses. Together with the rise in thenumber of college students with LD in traditional colleges and universities, therewas also a significant increase in the number of students with LD in distance learn-ing institutions. For example, at the Open University of Israel (OUI), a distancelearning university where the present study was conducted, the percentage ofstudents with LD in the total population of students grew from 1.08% in 1994–1995 to 5% in 2001–2002, of a total enrolment of 32,000 students (Heiman &Precel, 2003).

However, the number of students with LD in institutions of higher education isstill far smaller than the number of people with LD in the general population, whichis 5% to 20%, according to the definition of learning disability used in varioussurveys (Gerber & Reiff, 1994; Gadbow & DuBois, 1998). For example, thepercentage of students with LD in US colleges in 2000 was only 2.4% (Henderson,2001). Moreover, a study which examined postsecondary school attendance andcollege completion rate indicated that students with LD were less likely to attendcolleges or to graduate than their peers without LD (Murray et al., 2000). Anotherstudy indicated that only 14% of students with learning disabilities in the US(compared to 53% of students in the general population) attended a postsecondaryschool program within two years of leaving high school (Blackorby & Wagner,1996).

Teaching in distance learning courses is mainly text-centered rather than face-to-face. For students with print-related learning problems, reading might be slow andnot fluent, and the difficulties in learning that distance learners with LD face areintensified. One of the technologies developed to overcome students’ reading diffi-culties is computer programs that provide synthetic speech output, synchronizedwith text. Several such programs are commercially available (ReadPlease™, AT&TNatural Voices Text-to-Speech Engine™, Kurzweill 3000™, WYNN™, Screen-Reader™ and others). It is assumed that the benefit of text-to-speech computerprograms stems from the presentation of the text through both visual and auditory

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 21

channels (Hecker et al., 2002). Some of the commercial assistive software, such asthe Kurzweill 3000™, includes, in addition, digital study tools which aim to supportlearning.

The majority of the studies that illustrate the effectiveness of text-to-speech tech-nology for people with LD focus on students in conventional face-to-face institutes.To the best of our knowledge, the benefits of assistive technologies for adult highereducation students with LD who study from a distance have not been studied.Therefore, we decided to examine whether a learning environment that providescomputer display of the text, synchronized with auditory output and accompaniedby additional computerized assistive applications, contributes to the learningprocess of students with LD studying from a distance. We conducted our studywith students who are enrolled in a distance learning course at the OUI. The OUIis a distance learning university, fully accredited by the Israeli Council for HigherEducation, which in 2003 served 36,000 undergraduate and graduate students invarious fields of knowledge. Unlike most other academic institutions, where teach-ing is based on face-to-face lectures, the courses offered by the OUI are intendedfor self-study, based on written materials and accompanied by tutorial meetings,Internet technology, written assignments and exams. At the OUI, students with LDare assisted by experts from the university center for students with learning disabili-ties (CSLD), who professionally diagnose the students who apply and furnish themwith individual help and workshops. In the current study, we will describe thelearning environment, discuss the students’ satisfaction with the technology, andexamine the prospects of its implementation in distance learning for students withLD. Although the number of students with LD who participated in the study wassmall, the general agreement among them regarding the advantages and benefits ofthe learning environment indicates that assistive technologies of the kind describedhere might be helpful for students with LD studying at a distance, and warrantfurther investigation.

Methodology

Subjects and design

The study was conducted over two semesters, with two different groups of students.Undergraduate students previously diagnosed by the CSLD as students with LD, andwho were enrolled in the distance learning, semester-long course Introduction toPsychology were informed about the study. Twenty-four students (20 females, 4males) had the appropriate hardware to run the software and expressed an interest inparticipating in the study. All of these students had taken distance learning coursesbefore, and 83% had taken more than two courses. The types of LD in the group ofstudents varied: 14 students (58%) were diagnosed as having attention disorders and10 (42%) as dyslexic with attention disorders. For purposes of comparison, sixteenstudents (7 female, 9 male) not identified as having any learning disability who wereenrolled in the course and expressed an interest also participated in the study. An

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

22 J. Klemes et al.

electronic study unit on CD-ROM on the subject of memory was mailed to thestudents, together with the other printed materials. All participants were loaned Acro-bat 4.05 ME™ computer software which enabled them to work in the computerizedlearning environment, and were given a printed or computerized (oral) guidebook.Students with LD were offered a face-to-face training session to acquaint them withthe computer program; however, only four attended the meeting. After the studentscompleted the electronic unit and the accompanying assignments, they were asked torespond to a 36-item attitude questionnaire developed by the researchers. Studentswith LD answered the questions in a structured telephone interview, conducted byone person, while the other students answered the same questions through a writtenquestionnaire.

Materials

The learning environment. We developed a CD-ROM that contained the text,synchronized with speech output, of a complete study unit on ‘memory’ in the courseIntroduction to Psychology. The learning environment included digitized study skilltools to support learning, which enabled the user to do the following:

● Read a text that is displayed on the computer screen and simultaneously listen toit being read aloud.

● Choose between two reading speeds: 140 or 110 words per minute.● Reread and listen again to self-selected paragraphs that were difficult to understand

the first time.● Navigate among topics without having to reread or listen again to those parts of the

text that are irrelevant to the specific topic.● Use different colors to highlight words, sentences or paragraphs that are either

essential to the understanding of the topic, require a repeat reading, or are unclear.● Add written notes in different colors to the text while reading and listening to it.● Dictate notes while reading and listening to the text, using a microphone.● Assemble the highlighted paragraphs and the notes in a separate file for further

study and review.● Change the display of the text on the screen.● Search for a specific word or sentence in the text.

The language of instruction at the OUI is Hebrew; therefore, we needed a digitaltool that would enable us to present the oral text in this language. The software thatwas adapted to construct the learning environment was Adobe Acrobat 4.05 ME™,which provides all of the above features and is commercially available. The printedtext of the unit (in Hebrew) was read aloud and combined with the text. The textwas presented on the computer screen, initially using double-spaced 14-point Arial.Two reading speeds were available, using Sound Forge™ software to slow down theoriginal reading speed. A screenshot of the learning environment is presented inFigure 1.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 23

Figure 1. A computer screen of the learning environment, with some of the digitized features: 1 a, b – speed of speech (faster and slower, respectively); 2 – a written note, open; 3 – a written note, closed; 4 – a spoken note, closed; 5 – word highlighting; 6 – word marking

Results

Duration of learning

Students with LD frequently face difficulties because of slow reading rate or poororganizational skills. It has been shown that using computer readers enhances thereading rate of adults with dyslexia, makes reading less tiring and less stressful, andmakes the time they are able devote to reading more sustained (Elkind et al., 1996).It was, therefore, important to determine whether the electronic study unit, one ofwhose major components was oral presentation, affected the time that students spenton it (Table 1).

The results show that studying the electronic unit did affect time spent studying:in the first semester of the study, we asked the students with LD how long it tookthem to study a printed unit, and whether studying an electronic unit took more orless time. Of the respondents (N = 8), four said that the time required to study theelectronic unit was shorter than the average time that they spent on a printed unit;

Figure 1. A computer screen of the learning environment, with some of the digitized features: 1a, b – speed of speech (faster and slower, respectively); 2 – a written note, open; 3 – a written note,closed; 4 – a spoken note, closed; 5 – word highlighting; 6 – word marking

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

24 J. Klemes et al.

three said that the electronic unit took them longer, and one said that the timerequired for learning was the same. The following semester, the students were askedto measure (in hours) how long they spent studying the different units. Of the ninestudents who took the course in the second semester, five spent five hours or lessstudying the electronic study unit, while most of the students (14 out of 23 in bothsemesters) needed six hours or more to complete the printed unit. Moreover, rela-tively more students completed the electronic unit in only two hours, and no studentneeded more than 15 hours, compared to six (of 23) who needed more than 15 hoursto complete the printed unit. The results are in accordance with what is alreadyknown from the literature: students with LD need less time to read a text when it issynchronized with auditory presentation (Elkind et al., 1996). Interestingly, in arecent large-scale study conducted at the OUI, students with LD who were notfamiliar with the technology described here claimed that nothing could help themlearn faster (Heiman & Precel, 2003).

Attitudes toward the electronic learning environment

The students who participated in this survey were already experienced distance learn-ers and this was not their first distance learning course. We therefore expected thatfor at least some of the students who were used to studying with printed materials andwho had already developed their own learning strategies, the new experience wouldbe problematic. Indeed, when the students were asked if they were satisfied with theelectronic learning environment, eight students of the 13 who responded were highlysatisfied, four expressed a low level of satisfaction or none at all, and one expressedonly passable satisfaction.

The high level of satisfaction with the computerized learning environment becameclearer when students with LD were asked to compare, in more detail, how the elec-tronic and the printed study unit contributed to the learning process. The comparisonis presented in Table 2.

Table 1. Time devoted to studying electronic and printed units by students with LD

Electronic unita

N = 9Printed unitb

N = 23

Hours spent studying n n

< 2 3 33–5 2 66–9 2 310–14 2 5> 15 – 6

asecond semester onlybboth semesters

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 25

Most of the students said that the computerized learning environment improvedtheir understanding, concentration, comprehension, control and enjoyment. Forstudents with LD who study from a distance, the fact that almost all of them neededless help from tutors, compared to the support they needed when studying fromconventional printed materials, is a significant factor in their learning and representsa major advantage of the computerized environment. Similar responses were given bystudents without LD, indicating that the learning environment examined could serveother students as well.

The digitized study tools included in the computerized learning environment wererecommended by specialists from the CSLD as tools which could support learning.Therefore, it was important to see which tools were most utilized by the students.This could also indicate which learning strategies students preferred. Table 3 showsthat the students made use of highlighting and marking of sentences, performedsearches, and added spoken notes to the text. The benefit of strategic note-taking forhigh school students with LD during lectures has already been demonstrated (Aikenet al., 1975; Suritsky, 1993; Boyle & Weishaar, 2001). However, written language isthe most common difficulty for students with LD (Adelman & Vogel, 1991), and itis not surprising that students with difficulties in writing prefer spoken note-taking,

Table 2. Contribution to the learning process of electronic and printed units (students with LD)

Contribution to: Electronic unit Printed unit No difference

Understanding (N = 10) 8 1 1Concentration (N = 12) 10 2 –Comprehension (N = 10) 7 1 2Memorizing (N = 11) 9 2 –Control (N = 10) 7 1 2Enjoyment (N = 11) 9 2 –Required tutor’s help (N = 8) 7 1 –

Table 3. Contribution of the digitized components of the electronic learning environment to the learning process (students with LD) (N = 12)

Digitized components used: Very often / often Medium Only a little Not at all

Search 4 2 3 3Written notes 1 4 2 5

Reading notes – 3 1 8

Copy & paste 1 2 1 8

Printing 1 – – 11

Highlighting & marking 7 – – 5

Spoken notes 5 2 – 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

26 J. Klemes et al.

rather than typed notes. As far as we know, the benefit of adding spoken notes to atext by college students with LD has not been studied, and our observations warrantfurther investigation.

Students’ interview comments

The positive attitude of the students with LD to the electronic study unit was empha-sized in their responses to the open questions asked in the phone interview. About halfof the students with LD indicated that the electronic unit had no disadvantages. Mostof the students reported that the electronic learning environment was user-friendly.Two-thirds stated that the electronic unit helped them to overcome various difficultiesin learning. Interestingly, the same proportion of students without LD, who were askedthe same question in a written questionnaire, gave the same response. Most of thestudents with LD listened to the spoken text while reading it on the screen, with noneed to print it out. However, a few noted that reading from the screen requires training.Almost all of the students with LD said that they would like to receive similar electronicstudy units in other courses as well, and some said that they would want a multimediacomponent added to it. Some of the students’ comments are summarized below:

What is your general opinion of the electronic study unit?

● Beneficial to the learning process, added motivation, nice when the material isspoken.

● It teaches you to sit in one place in order to study.● A disaster.● Much more interesting; nice and fun to learn.● Learning becomes more experiential; can be taken everywhere.● Re-listening is easier than re-reading.

In what ways did the electronic method help you?

● It saved time.● It made sure that I wouldn’t skip words and sentences while reading.● It’s less frightening than the piles of printed material I usually get.● The electronic unit helped me to keep up with the pace of the other students.● I could internalize more; it’s easier to listen several times than to read again and again.● I could be more concentrated.● I didn’t have to re-read it.● It didn’t help me. The spoken text confused me; tools that might help to organize

the information were missing.

What were the disadvantages of the electronic study unit?

● The electronic unit is not as moveable as the book.● It’s difficult to read from a computer screen.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 27

● I was more passive.● I like to summarize what I read in the margins; I couldn’t do it on the screen.

Students’ achievements

Graded assignments which the students submit during the semester and send to theirtutors are an integral part of distance learning courses at the OUI. We were interestedto see whether the computerized learning environment affected the academic perfor-mance of students with LD who participated in the study. No significant differencewas found in the grades of the assignment which included questions on the unit on‘memory’ between students with LD who studied from the electronic unit andstudents with LD who were enrolled in the same course in a previous semester andstudied from the printed unit only. We can, therefore, conclude that the electronicunit does not directly contribute to the academic achievements of the distance learn-ing students with LD; however, this should be further examined on a larger numberof students and with other topics. It is important to note that students’ responsesindicated that the electronic unit made their academic tasks easier.

The computerized learning environment and students without LD

The main reason for the development of the computerized learning environment wasto support the learning process of students with LD and evaluate its effectiveness.However, it was also interesting to see how students without LD used the computerizedenvironment and to what extent they were satisfied with it. In general, the contributionof the electronic unit to the learning process of students without LD was very similarto that for students with LD. Half of the students were extremely satisfied with theelectronic unit, while nearly a third expressed fair satisfaction (N = 16). Half thestudents said that the electronic unit contributed to their understanding, and the sameproportion planned to use the electronic unit to study before the final exam. Most ofthe students indicated that the spoken text helped them to finish studying the unit faster,and expressed interest in receiving electronic units in other courses. Some of thestudents noted that reading from the computer screen was not convenient. Theypreferred that the computer serve only to present visual aids, such as graphs, tablesand multimedia components, and not substitute for the printed material. Some indi-cated that reading and listening simultaneously was slower than reading alone, thereforethe spoken text was unnecessary. This contrasts with the responses of students with LD.

An interesting difference between the two groups of students was the stage in thelearning process when they used the electronic unit. While a similar proportion ofstudents in the two groups read the electronic unit before the tutorial session, morestudents with LD used it when doing their assignment, and more students withoutLD used it for review. Preparing an assignment requires organization and classifica-tion skills which may be more difficult for students with LD (Lerner & Lerner, 1991).They may, therefore, find the search function of the electronic unit helpful forlocating the material they need for preparing their answers (Table 3).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

28 J. Klemes et al.

Other differences between the two groups of students regarding the use of theelectronic unit were found in some of their responses to the open questions. Some ofthe students without LD only read the text from the computer screen, without listen-ing to the text. An interesting difference between the two groups of students wasfound in their use of the print option of the electronic unit. While only one of the 12students with LD took advantage of this option, four of the 16 students without LDprinted out the text before reading it. Although this relates only to a small group ofstudents, it may suggest a basic difference between the two groups: while readingfrom print is the major learning strategy for students without LD, students with LDare more comfortable when listening to the text being read.

Discussion

The learning environment described here could mainly benefit students with prob-lems in the areas of concentration, reading and writing, and is especially applicable todistance learners, who are physically separated from the instructor.

The main learning method in distance learning institutions is text-based, either viaprinted books or, more recently, web pages. This learning method has both advan-tages and disadvantages for students with LD. On one hand, the students can studyat home, at their own pace, and are not restricted to a rigid timetable as in face-to-face lectures. On the other hand, distance learning students with reading problemsmay have difficulty with the large amounts of textual material included in a distancelearning course which, according to one of the students, is ‘frightening’. In addition,research has indicated that students with LD tend to be helped by their peers(Raskind, 1998; Raskind & Higgins, 1998), which is more difficult when learning isaccomplished from a distance. As a result, the learning time of distance students withLD is usually greater; they have more difficulty understanding the material and manyof them need external support, such as being read to by family members or friends(CSLD, 2004, personal communication). This may result in a discrepancy betweentheir learning potential and their actual level of academic achievement.

The implementation of commercially available speech synthesizers in distancelearning institutions has a number of limitations. Only a few of the commercial speechsynthesizer computer programs (such as AT&T Natural Voices Text-to-SpeechEngine® or ReadPlease®) operate in languages other than English, such as French,German and Spanish. The advantage of the software described here is that developerscan create natural spoken text documents in any language with ease. This may beadvantageous for students with LD in countries where the spoken language is not onethat the commercial text-to-speech computer programs support, including underde-veloped countries.

Moreover, in spite of technological improvements, such as the choice of a male orfemale voice, accent and pitch variations, the voices in the updated commercialspeech synthesizers still sound mechanical and are, to many, unintelligible. Underthese circumstances, we can assume that adult students with mild LD would stillprefer to read the text, without the disturbance of synchronized digitized synthetic

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 29

speech. This assumption is in accordance with what has already been demonstrated;i.e., computer programs that provide speech-text synchronicity were beneficial onlyto college students with severe disabilities, whereas for other students, such asstudents with mild disorders, the technology actually represented a disturbance or didnot affect their scores (Higgins & Zvi, 1995; Montali & Lewandowski, 1996; Higgins& Raskind, 1997; Elkind, 1998; MacArthur et al., 2001). We assume that naturalspoken text, such as the voice in the learning environment described here, wouldsupport the reading of students with mild LD as well.

However, human voice recording is time-consuming and expensive. In our case, wewere lucky that the OUI course was already available on an audiocassette for thebenefit of blind students. In Israel, more than 100 OUI distance learning courses areavailable on audiocassettes in the Central Library for the Blind, and it is possible thatsuch centers exist in other countries as well. Another source of a human voice is therecording of a face-to-face lecture. The recorded lecture can then be transcribed toprint, using the Acrobat™ software as the learning environment.

A dominant factor in the academic achievements of students with LD is the use ofefficient learning strategies (Lerner, 2000). This includes, for example, various waysof summarizing, highlighting sentences in order to emphasize important topics,taking notes, etc. (Lenz et al., 1996; Heiman & Precel, 2003). It is reasonable toassume that in order to use the computerized learning environment described hereefficiently, a training session may be needed, in which the students would be exposedto the various options inherent in the technology. Each student could then decidewhich strategy and tool to use in order to overcome specific LD (see Table 3). Inother words, using the computerized learning environment in combination withlearning strategies training is recommended.

An interesting finding in this study was the relatively large number of students whoadded spoken notes to the text. Taking notes during lectures is advantageous forincreasing comprehension and improving later recall of information, as demonstratedby Aiken et al. (1975) and by others (cited in Beecher, 1988; Suritsky, 1993; Boyle &Weishaar, 2001). However, for many students with LD, written language is one ofthe most difficult academic areas (Boyle & Weishaar, 2001; Sturm & Rankin-Erick-son, 2002), and it has been reported that students with LD take fewer notes duringlectures (Suritsky, 1993; Hughes & Suritsky, 1994; Boyle & Weishaar, 2001).Furthermore, many college students with LD lack skills for taking short and discretenotes, and they usually do not use written learning strategies to help them to remem-ber. This is in contrast to students without LD, who prefer written learning strategies(Heiman & Precel, 2003). Future research could examine the types of spoken notestaken by students with LD: whether they are mainly summaries, questions, topics tobe remembered for the exam, or others. This may help tutors direct students in howto organize, classify and categorize their written and spoken notes in differentcomputer files, so that the notes could better support further learning and compre-hension of specific topics.

A traditional distance learning course based on printed books is highly structured,e.g., most students read the books in a linear fashion. In contrast, a computerized

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

30 J. Klemes et al.

learning environment enables non-linear learning, including hypertext whichactivates a link to a different but related topic in the course. Non-linear learning andhypermedia navigation is not considered advantageous for young students with LD(MacArthur & Haynes, 1995), but its implications for adult, distance learningstudents with LD has not been thoroughly investigated. The study described here wasconducted on only one unit of a course; it would be beneficial to investigate the impli-cations of non-linear learning and hypermedia navigation in all 12 units of the course,and we are planning to conduct such a study in the near future.

Most students who participated in our study exhibit a low ability to sustain readingover long periods of time and a slow reading rate, due to attention disorders anddyslexia. Attention disorders and reading disabilities tend to co-occur (Schulte et al.,1999; Hecker et al., 2002). Previous studies have shown that students with attentiondisorders may have difficulties in learning, due to difficulty in sustaining attention anddisturbances in short-term memory (Robin, 1998). Indeed, in a recent studyconducted at the OUI, students with LD reported that attention difficulties were oneof the main causes of problems in writing and reading (Heiman & Precel, 2003). Asa result, students with LD need to invest more time in their studies than studentswithout LD. The extensive time they invest in their studies enables them to overcometheir difficulties and successfully complete their academic studies. Moreover, sincethe students in this study were experienced distance learners, we can assume that theyhad already developed learning strategies to overcome their learning difficulties. Thisassumption might explain the fact that there was no significant difference between thestudents with LD and the other students on their assignment scores. This finding hasbeen supported in other studies which demonstrated that the average grades ofstudents with LD are not significantly different from the grades of the other studentsat the OUI (Heiman & Precel, 2003; Beyth-Marom, 2004, personal communication),probably due to the high motivation of the former (Hall et al., 2002). Irrespective ofthe students’ experience, for almost all of them the computerized learning environ-ment proved beneficial. It is possible that for inexperienced students this learningenvironment could be even more helpful.

In spite of the fact that during the last decade the number of students with LD hasincreased (Henderson, 2001; Heiman & Precel, 2003; Mull & Sitlington, 2003), weassume that the difficulties which students with LD face prevent others from enteringhigher education, especially in distance learning institutions. To the best of ourknowledge, the possible benefit to adult distance learning students of assistivetechnology that includes all the computerized components described here has notbeen explored. Although the number of students who participated in the study wasrelatively small, their positive comments regarding the contribution of the digitalenvironment to the learning process suggest that the general population of studentswith LD studying from a distance might benefit from it. Moreover, learning environ-ments of the kind described here can help not only students who are already enrolledin distance learning institutions, but also make higher education through distancelearning more accessible to others with LD, who at present are reluctant to attemptto take on the challenge of academic studies.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

An assistive computerized learning environment 31

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Open University of Israel Research Authority.

References

Adelman, P. & Vogel, S. A. (1991) The learning disabled adult, in: B. Wong (Ed.) Learning aboutlearning disabilities (New York, Academic Press), 563–594.

Aiken, E. G., Thomas, G. S. & Shennum, W. A. (1975) Memory for a lecture: effect of notes,lecture rate, and informational density, Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(3), 439–444.

Beecher, J. (1988) Note-taking: what do we know about the benefits (ERIC, The EducationalResources Information Center, ERIC Digests No. ED 300805. Atlanta, GA, Georgia StateUniversity). Available online at: http://www.thememoryhole.org/edu/eric/ed300805.html(accessed 8 December 2005).

Blackorby, J. & Wagner, M. (1996) Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities:findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study, Exceptional Children, 62(5), 399–413

Boyle, J. R. & Weishaar, M. (2001) The effect of strategic notetaking on the recall and comprehensionof lecture information for high school students with learning disabilities, Learning DisabilitiesResearch and Practice, 16(3), 133–141. Available online at: http://teachingld.org/pdf/014.pdf(accessed 8 December 2005).

Bryant, B. R. & Seay, P. C. (1998) The technology-related assistance to individuals with disabilitiesact: Relevance to individuals with learning disabilities and their advocates, Journal of LearningDisabilities, 31(1), 4–15.

Day, S. L. & Edwards, B. J. (1996) Assistive technology for postsecondary students with learningdisabilities, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(5), 486–492. Available online at: http://www.ldon-line.org/ld_indepth/technology/postsecondary_tech.html (accessed 8 December 2005).

Elkind, J. (1998) Computer reading machines for poor readers, Perspectives — The InternationalDyslexia Association, 24(2), 9–14. Available online at: http://kurzweiledu.com/files/efficacy.pdf(accessed 8 December 2005).

Elkind, J., Black, M. & Murray, C. (1996) Computer-based compensation of adult reading disabil-ities, Annals of Dyslexia, 46, 159–186.

Gadbow, N. F. & DuBois, D. A. (1998) Adult learners with special needs: strategies & resources forpostsecondary education & workplace training (Melbourne, FL, Krieger).

Gerber, P. J. & Reiff, H. (1994) Learning disabilities in adulthood: persisting problems and evolvingissues (Austin, TX, Pro-Ed).

Hall, C. W., Spruill, K. L. & Webster, E. (2002) Motivational attitudinal factors in collegestudents with and without learning disabilities, Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(2), 79–86.

Hecker, L., Burns, L., Elkind, J., Elkind, K. & Katz, L. (2002) Benefits of assistive readingsoftware for students with attention disorders, Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 243–272.

Heiman, T. & Precel, K. (2003) Students with learning disabilities in higher education: academicstrategies profile, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(3), 248–258.

Henderson, C. (2001) College freshmen with disabilities: a biennial statistical profile. HeathResource Center, American Council on Education. Available online at: http://www.heath.gwu.edu/PDFs/collegefreshmen.pdf (accessed 8 December 2005).

Higgins, E. L. & Raskind, M. H. (1997) The compensatory effectiveness of optical characterrecognition/speech synthesis on reading comprehension of postsecondary students with learn-ing disabilities, Learning Disabilities: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal, 8(2), 75–87.

Higgins, E. & Zvi, J. (1995) Assistive technology for post secondary students with learning disabil-ities: from research to practice, Annals of Dyslexia, 45, 123–142.

Hughes, C. A. & Suritsky, S. K. (1994) Note-taking skills of university students with and withoutlearning disabilities, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 20–24.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14

32 J. Klemes et al.

Lenz, B. K., Ellis, E. S. & Scanlon, D. (1996) Teaching learning strategies to adolescents and adultswith learning disabilities (Austin, TX, Pro-Ed).

Lerner, J. W. (2000) Learning disabilities: theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies (8th edn)(Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin).

Lerner, J. W. & Lerner, S. R. (1991) Attention deficit disorder: issues and questions, Focus onExceptional Children, 24(3), 1–7.

Lewis, R. B. (1998) Reading software for students with learning disabilities: hypermedia-basedchildren’s literature, LD Online. Available online at: http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/tech-nology/lewis_rdgsftware.html (accessed 8 December 2005).

Lewis, R. B. (2000) Musing on technology and learning disabilities on the occasion of the newmillennium, Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(2). Available online at: http://jset.unlv.edu/15.2/Lewis/first.html (accessed 8 December 2005).

MacArthur, C. A., Ferretti, R. P., Okolo, C. M. & Cavalier, A. R. (2001) Technology applicationsfor students with literacy problems: a critical review, Elementary School Journal, 101(3), 273–301.

MacArthur, C. A. & Haynes, J. B. (1995) Student assistant learning from text (SALT): a hypermediareading aid, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 150–159.

Maccini, P., Gagnon, J. C. & Hughes, C. A. (2002) Technology-based practices for secondarystudents with learning disabilities, Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(4), 247–261.

Montali, J. & Lewandowski, L. (1996) Bimodal reading: benefits of a talking computer averageand less skilled readers, Journal of Learning Disability, 29(3), 271–279.

Mull, C. A. & Sitlington, P. L. (2003) The role of technology in the transition to postsecondaryeducation of students with learning disabilities, The Journal of Special Education, 37(1), 26–32.

Murray, C., Goldstein, D. E., Nourse, S. & Edgar, E. (2000) The postsecondary schoolattendance and completion rates of high school graduates with learning disabilities, LearningDisabilities Research & Practice, 15(3), 119–127.

National Institute for Literacy (1995) Adults with learning disabilities: definitions and issues. Availableonline at: http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/ld/archive/definiti.htm (accessed 8 December 2005).

Raskind, M. H. (1998) Literacy for adults with learning disabilities through assistive technology,in: S. A. Vogel & S. Reder (Eds) Bridging the gap: learning disabilities, literacy, and adulteducation (Baltimore, MD, Brookes), 253–268.

Raskind, M. H. & Higgins, E. L. (1998) Assistive technology for postsecondary students withlearning disabilities: an overview, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 27–40.

Robin, A. (1998) ADHD in adolescents: diagnosis and treatment (New York, Guilford Press).Schulte, A. C., Conners, C. K. & Osborne, S. (1999) Linkages between attention deficit disorders

and reading disability, in: D. D. Duane (Ed.) Reading and attention disorders (Baltimore, MD,York Press), 161–184.

Sturm, J. M. & Rankin-Erickson, J. L. (2002) Effect of hand-drawn and computer-generatedconcept mapping on the expository writing of middle school students with learning disabilities,Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 124–139.

Suritsky, S. K. (1993) Notetaking difficulties and approaches reported by university students withlearning disabilities, Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 10(1), 3–10.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

este

rn O

ntar

io]

at 0

2:52

14

Nov

embe

r 20

14