You are here:

Working With an Imperfect Medium: Speech Recognition Technology in Reading Practice
Article

, Bogazici University, Turkey

Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Volume 15, Number 3, ISSN 1055-8896 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This study focused on the read-aloud and attendant behaviors of learners working with an experimental computer-based program, which made use of speech recognition technology to provide reading practice with immediate feedback for beginning readers. The study drew on data from 13 participants, who used the software as part of their twice-weekly schedule for six to eight weeks at an adult basic education site in New York. Each user's data were analyzed using various interrelated coding and analytical schemes to uncover the nature and value of the user-software interactions. In addition, observations and interviews were conducted. The analyses, based on over 10,000 practice instances and numerous responses to comprehension questions, were done in terms of two broad categories; patterns of interaction, and influence of reading practice afforded by the software. The findings showed that there were metacognitive as well as word level patterns of interaction; that the users were most commonly engaged in attempts at self-correction, and that reading and/or pronunciation tended toward the target as practice ensued. Guidelines were suggested for software improvement and the applicability of speech recognition technology in literacy instruction.

Citation

Kartal, G. (2006). Working With an Imperfect Medium: Speech Recognition Technology in Reading Practice. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(3), 303-328. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 28, 2023 from .

© 2006 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Adams, M. J. (1995). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  2. Baker, D.E. (2000). The effects of speech recognition software and word processing on the written expression of students with disabilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.
  3. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fi ve traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  4. Dalby, J., & Kewley-Port, D. (1999). Explicit pronunciation training using automatic speech recognition technology. CALICO Journal, 16(3), 425-445.
  5. De Jong, J. H.A.L., & Van Ginkel, L. W. (1992) Dimensions in oral foreign language profi ciency. In L. Verhoeven & J. H. De Jong (Eds.), The construct of language profi ciency (pp. 187-205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  6. Education Development Center (2001). Speaking to write. Realizing the potential of speech recognition for secondary students with disabilities. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://www.edc.org/spk2wrt
  7. Ehri, L. C. (1984). How orthography alters spoken language competencies in children learning to read and spell. In J. Downing & R. Valtin (Eds.), Language awareness and learning to read (pp. 119-171). New York: Springerguage awareness and learning to read (pp. 119-171). New York: Springerguage awareness and learning to read Verlag.
  8. Eide, E., Gish, H., Jeanrenaud, P., & Mielke, A. (1995). Understanding and improving speech recognition performance through the use of diagnostic tools. Proceedings of the 1995 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, (Vol. 1, 221-224). Retrieved May 27, 2006, from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/tocresult.jsp?isnumber=10215&isYear=1995 Goodwin, J., Brinton, D., & Celce-Murcia, M. (1994). Pronunciation assessment in the ESL/EFL Curriculum. In J. Morley (Ed.), Pronunciation pedagogy and theory: New views, new directions. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.
  9. Hopey, C. E., Harvey-Morgan, J., & Ruthmeyer, R. K. (1996). Technology and adult literacy: Findings from a survey on technology use in adult literacy programs. NCAL Technical Report TR96-12. Philadelphia: National Center on Adult Literacy, University of Pennsylvania.
  10. Juel, C. (1996). What makes literacy tutoring effective? Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 268-289.
  11. Labbo, L. & Kuhn, M. (1998). Electronics symbol making: Young children’s computer-related emerging concepts about literacy. In D. Reiking, M. C. McKenna, L.D. Labbo, & R. D. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology. Transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  12. Lerner, E. (1994). Talking to your computer. IBM Research, Number 3, 1994, 8-14.
  13. McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. New York: Longman.
  14. Mehan, H. (1989). Microcomputers in classrooms: Educational technology or social practice? Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 20, 4-22.
  15. Mostow, J., & Aist, G. S. (1999). Giving help and praise in a reading tutor with imperfect listening—because automated speech recognition means never being able to say you’re certain. CALICO Journal, 16(3), 407-424.
  16. Mostow, J., & Aist, G. S. (2001). Evaluating tutors that listen: An overview of Project LISTEN. In K. D. Forbus & P. J. Feltovich (Eds.), Smart machines in education (pp. 169-234). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  17. Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1999). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. In J. Leather (Ed), Phonological issues in language learning (pp. 285-310). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  18. Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984) How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330.
  19. Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.
  20. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientifi c research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm
  21. Nix, D., Fairweather, P., & Adams, W. (1998). Speech recognition, children, and reading. In C. M. Karat & A. Lund (Eds.), CHI 98 Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 245-246). New York: The Association of Computing Machinery.
  22. Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press. Quinlan, T. H. (2002). Speech recognition technology and the writing processes of students with writing diffi culties: Improving fl uency. Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.
  23. Reinking, D., & Watkins, J. (2000). A formative experiment investigating the use of multimedia book reviews to increase elementary students’ independent reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 384-419.
  24. Rosen, D. J. (2000). Using electronic technology in adult literacy education. In J. Comings, B. Garner, & C. Smith. (Eds.), Annual review of adult learning and literacy, (Vol. 1, pp.304-315). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  25. Russell, M., Series, R. W., Wallace, J. L., Brown, C., & Skilling, A. (2000). The STAR system: An interactive pronunciation tutor for young children. Computer Speech and Language, 14, 161-175.
  26. Sabatini, J. P. (2001). Designing multimedia learning systems for adult learners: Basic skills with a workforce emphasis. NCAL Working Paper WP00-01. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, National Center on Adult Literacy.
  27. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 260-407.
  28. Smith, C. R. (2001). Click and turn the page: An exploration of multiple storybook literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 152-183.
  29. Williams, S.M. (2000). What children learn from using Watch-me!-Read. A report prepared for IBM.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References