leap pad/tag reading system
DESCRIPTION
A presentation on Leap Pad/Tag Reading System. This technology is analyzed according to the multimedia principles and compared to picture booksTRANSCRIPT
LeapPad/Tag Reading System: An Analysis Based on the Multimedia Learning Principals
Presented by:
Janine Corbin
Huaye Li
Alyce Brookfield
October 2010
LeapPad/Tag Reading System
*An electronic interactive children’s book for children aged 4-8.
*Purpose to help with reading and literacy skills.
*Produce by LeapFrog Enterprises from 1998-2008.
*Average Cost: $50/unit + $15/book
*A form of computer assisted instruction.
*Tag Reading System superseded the Leap Pad.*Leap Track (Campuzano et al. 2009)
Tag ReadingSystem
LeapPad
Spatial Contiguity Principle
The LeapPad has a perfect layout for the reading learners. Pictures and words are presented right after each other.
Temporal Contiguity Principle
Another beauty of LeapPad is when you use your pencil touch the pictures on the book, you can find the words and pictures are presented simultaneously.
Coherence Principle
Right on the target.
No extraneous words or pictures will come out.
There are sound effects.
Modality Principle
Illustrations and Narration come together
Redundancy Principle Eliminates extraneous cognitiveload.
Advantages of LeapPad:•Graphics/narration•Coordination
Experimental Research•Miller (1937)•Mayer&Moreno (1998)
Segmenting Principle
Individual Paceversusfast and continuous
Disadvantage:-Continuous
Experimental Research•Mayer&Chandler (2001)•Mayer&Dow (2003)
Make this a pause button
Pretraining Principle
An introduction to the story is provided
But
*Key story elements are not given
*Key words are not defined
*Readers are not prompted to use a specific decoding or comprehension strategy
Olivia is a precocious pig.
This story is a day in the life of Olivia. It doesn’t follow a problem and solution format.
Make connections between Olivia’s life and yours as you read.
Signaling Principle
Yes, there are no digital animations to distract me! (Reinking, D. 2005)
But:
*Should I listen to the entire page? Or read it word by word?
*Should I access the comprehension questions?
*What word did I just read?
*What are the key words on the page?
*Is it important that I know the meaning of that word?
*Am I really ready to move on? (Florida Center For Reading Research, 2003)
A beneficial change:
Voice Principle
Different words have different accents
Is this really a problem for children? (Reinking, D. 2005)
Personalization Principle
Comprehension questions are asked using the first person
But
Introduction to story does not make direct comments to the learner
Do you think…?
Individual Difference Principle
Normal Bottom-Up Process of Learning to Read: (Blok et al., 2002)
1. Pre-Reading: A a2. Decoding: A or a /ah/ and /c/ /a/ /t/ cat3. Fluency/Comprehension: The cat lives in the hat (Time: 5 seconds)
LeapPad/Tag designed for: 1. Pre-Reading
2. Decoding Fluency/ComprehensionBut:LeapPad/Tag only supports: (Romig et al., unknown)
low end users fluency, basic comprehension (oral retell)high end users fluency, basic comprehension (oral retell) and
late-stage decoding (phonics)
Thus, need Leap Track, Leap Desk, Leap Mat(Ogura et al., 2007)
Compared to Books
Principle LeapPad/Tag compared to Picture BooksSpatial Continguity LeapPad/Tag = Picture Books
Temporal Continguity LeapPad/Tag = Picture Books
Coherence LeapPad/Tag < Picture Books
Modality LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
Redundance LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Segmenting LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Pretraining LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Signaling LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Personalization LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
Voice LeapPad/Tag < Picture Books
Individual Difference LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
Bibliography
•Blok H., Oostdam, R., Otter, M.E., and Overmat, M. (2002). Computer-Assisted Instruction in Support of Beginning Reading Insruction: A Review. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 101-130.•Campuzano, L., Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., and Rall, K. (2009). Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings From Two Student Cohorts (NCEE 2009-4041). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.•Florida Center For Reading Research. (2003, October). LeapTrack Assessment & Instructional System. Retrieved from: http://www.fcrr.org/reports.htm•www.leapfrog.com•Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., and Reifsneider, D. (2009). Technology in schools: What the research says: An update. Culver City, CA: Commissioned by Cisco.•Mayer, R.E., & Chandler, P.(2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-813•Mayer, R.E., & Dow, G., Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-81•Mayer, R.E.,& Moreno,R. (1998). A spilt attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing system in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2). 312-320.•Miller, W. (1937). The picture crutch in reading. Elementary English Review, 14, 263-264.•Ogura, P., Coco, L., Bulat, J. (2007). Using innovative technology to foster reading development among young children with severe cognitive impairments. TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, 4(1)Article 3.•Reinking, D. (2005). Multimedia learning if reading. In Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 355-374). New York: Cambridge University Press.•Romig, N., Yan, B., Zhao, Y. (Unknown). Impact of inexpensive interactive technology on early literacy development. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University.