A Surface Literature Review of the Computer Interface and Interventions within Special
Bjorn Pederson
Summer 2006
Computers and Special Education 2
Abstract
With the trend of computer access growing in classrooms, the need to understand the
This review examined a body of literature that applies to understanding the development
of the computer interface to the student across the years and the effect of computer
types that are being offered in which the student’s success has been documented. The
results are summarized. Limitations and applications of the research are also discussed.
Computers and Special Education 3
student presentation within the classroom has been present since the 1960s (Hansen,
1968). With the introduction of computers beyond that of the laboratory, many different
hopes and educational goals were formulated. The computer could serve as a means of
reinforcing the learned concepts through drill and practice (Hansen, 1968). The computer
could function as a tutor (Brady & Hill, 1984; Tenney & Osguthorpe, 1990). The
computer could also be used to free the teacher from presenting remediation sessions to
spend more time engaged in quality teaching time (Antonietti & Giorgetti, 2006). While
these hopes and goals have been partiality realized, due to the power and functionality of
the present day computers, the hopes and goals have yet to be realized to the full extent
intended.
With the change and advancement of computer technology, the need to understand
the effect of this new technology on student learning has grown. Fundamentally the
computer and related processes within the computer has not changed (e.g. binary
functioning), but the ability to apply and use these processes has grown. As the applied
use of computers has grown, so have the power, speed, and management of the processes
of computers (e.g. increase in hard drive size, ability to manage a bigger volume of data).
Computers have increased in their ability to hold, examine, manipulate, and display
information. This increase led to changes in the way that people can interact with a
computer including (a) entering, (b) using, and (c) displaying information. The interface
of the computer has moved from a generally text-based or command line interface (i.e.
Computers and Special Education 4
entering a command of print or run and waiting for the resulting text output) to that of a
graphical interface (i.e. the use a mouse or some other human interactive device to move
a graphical icon across the screen or to another location within the computer) (Berg,
2000). This movement from text- based to graphical interface has helped broaden the
population of computer users. Within the classroom, the move to a generally graphical
interface has allowed for greater acceptance into the classroom and has increased the
potential usability of the computer for both the teacher and the student.
With all the hopes and educational goals for computers within the classroom,
relatively few first-hand studies have been completed, examining the use of computers in
the classroom (Campbell, Milbourne, Dugan, & Wilcox., 2006). From the late 1960s to
the 1980s, published research into the use of computer and computer applications as a
learning medium reached its highest level. Since that time, the body of literature has
theoretical papers) (Campbell et al., 2006). The 1980s and the 1990s talked of the
theoretical advantaged of using a computer with the population of students with learning
disabilities (Hall, Hughes, & Filbert., 2000).The non-empirical publications provide some
information about what has worked in particular situations with students and teachers as
settings within both mainstream and special education population of students. There
appears to be gaps in the amount of research surrounding the areas of spelling, reading,
Computers and Special Education 5
and, the use of computers for behavioral interventions (Dawson, Venn, & Gunter, 2000;
Hitchcock, Dowrick, & Prater, 2003). With all of the excitement and potential viewed in
the use of computers in the classroom and CAI, the findings from the conducted research
may be over generalized (Brady & Hill, 1984). Only a limited number of large scale
studies have been conducted. A majority of the studies used small population samples of
The purpose of this review is to examine two different areas of computers within
education settings. The first area is focused on the how the interface between the students
and the computers has evolved through the years. The second area is focused on different
types of interventions that have utilized a computer as a source of skill acquisition or skill
Methods
First, an electronic database search of PsycINFO was conducted with the following
keywords arranged into three possible search fields for a total of 7 search term
aided instruction, computer assisted instruction, (field two) special education, computer,
academics, behavior disorder, emotional, and (field three) behavior, computer, emotional.
The search filter for peer-reviewed publications was selected. All articles selected were
also published between 1968 and 2006. In the initial database search, 357 articles were
identified from PsycINFO. Second, the 357 articles were screened for possible inclusion
Computers and Special Education 6
using the following constraints: the study must have focused on the use of computers
being involved within the study, a review including studies mentioning the use of
computer as an intervention type with students in special education or other wise defined
Results
Throughout the years there has been two main ways of human interface with
computers, the use of command language and the use of direct manipulation (Berg,
2000). The use of command language is commonly called the Command Line Interface
(CLI). This type of interaction with the computer is based on entering specific orders for
a process or action to happen (i.e. print, run, and load). The use of this kind of text based
input was prevalent in the early uses of computers in the classroom (Cotton, Gallagher, &
Marshall, 1978; Clements & Nastasi, 1999). The process involved understanding and
using the proper syntax for the computer or program to interrpret what was to happen in
the entered sequence of commands. The use of a graphical based input or graphical user
representing a file is moved from one folder into another, the movement is interpreted by
the computer into a command language and the file is moved within the computer.
The use of the CLI-type of interaction for students involved performing planning
activities in order for the program to function as desired (Clements & Nastasi, 1999).
Planning for the commands meant the students had to have some prior knowledge of
what the commands needed to be entered to cause the computer to perform the task as
Computers and Special Education 7
well as what effect the sequence of commands would have in the output. CLI type
interaction was also largely dependant on the use of the keyboard for entering and
executing the desired functions of the program (G. Fitzgerald, Fick, & Milich, 1986). The
text formatting of the letters used in the CLI environment were controlled primarily by
the monitor used. Text was either produced as white text on a dark background, a light
green text on a dark green background, or a light brown text on a dark brown background
With the growth of the power of computers and the inclusion of a higher level of
graphic capabilities of the personal computers in the classroom, the programs and
interface environment changed as well. While the use of the CLI environment was still
utilized, the commands entered into the computer or program would enable a graphic
image to change or move depending on the command used. The use of graphics in
combination to the typed commands helped to give a direct meaning to the term or value
As the ability of the computer grew, the computer was able to have a better
handling of both graphic and entered commands. The use of a Graphical User Interface
(GUI) became common place among computers used in schools (Blok, van Daalen-
Kapteijns, Otter, & Overmaat, 2001). The main instrument of input into a GUI type
environment was the mouse. The mouse controlled the curser and moved it around the
screen as opposed to the CLI environment where the curser would generally move in
linear motions from left to right during typing, or up, down, left, or right using the
directional curser keys. The mouse had from one to three buttons for use in selecting
items on the screen to move, copy, or delete. With the GUI, files, storage, or program
Computers and Special Education 8
placement. The use of GUI environments to operate computers not only became more
predominate, but also became common place among the programs that ran on the
computers.
The GUI allowed for operations on the computer or in programs to take place
without the student having knowledge of the command language needed to perform the
tasks desired. For a student to run a program, they did not have to be able to (a) use the
keyboard, (b) enter direct commands into the computer, (c) use the correct syntax, (d)
identify that it is the correct file, and (e) execute the file. The student now was able to use
the mouse, select the file using the buttons on the mouse, and performing a repeated click
of the mouse button, or double-click, to open a program. This use of GUI environments
in the classroom created bench mark for classroom computer use, pre- and post mouse
With the use of a GUI environment to interact with the computer, the student must
be able to understand what the different symbols present in the GUI mean in order to
understand what function of the computer or program is going to happen. A little icon of
a floppy disk is considered a universal sign for saving information at a particular point in
becomes easier. The need to remember command statements and syntax in order perform
tasks decreases. Programs running on a computer are able to use the GUI environment to
focus on the directed task for the student, rather than the student having to know the
coded sequence of events into order to write a paper using the computer. GUI
environments combined the use of symbolic icons and different forms of input to allow
Computers and Special Education 9
access to the various educational programs in a more direct way. By isolating the various
skills such as writing a sentence or performing an arithmetic problem, the keyboard use
by student was more of a function to complete a direct educational task rather than the
However, the implementation of more graphics and making the interface appear
more inviting than an average computer screen does not always create a better learning
environment for the student. In Bahr, Nelson, Van Meter, & Yanna (1996), students were
given the task to produce a writing sample using two different word processing programs.
One of the programs was an older program using a GUI environment, but did not have
many graphical features within the program. The other program was considered to have a
heavy graphical representation in the presentation of the program. The students in the
study tended to show a higher quality of structure within the writing samples constructed
in the older word processing program. The authors attributed this to the older program
not having as many visual distracters present when the students had to produce their
writing samples.
A majority of the programs used in the classroom for any student involve a mouse
Marchena, & Ruiz, 1998; Blok et al., 2001). Multimedia is the use of other forms of
stimuli in a computer program than just the reaction of sight on the computer screen to
induce a response. This goes farther than the use of the simple sounds that are able to be
created by the computer. This includes the use of a stereo sound, interactive video, and
hypertext. This aspect of multimedia brings an alternate form of engagement than the
traditional linear format of a text book or traditional video tape (Lawless & Brown,
Computers and Special Education 10
1997). The hypertext, text linking to other information, gives the student an opportunity
to gather other information about sub-topics, not just the main topic of the presented
material. The linked to source could be found within the program, within the computer,
local network, or The World Wide Web (Dillon & Gabbard, 1998). Hypertext also allows
for different sections of the material to be presented at anytime the student desired
(Lancaster, Schumaker, & Deshler, 2002). Hypertext allows for more control to the
student in how and when the information is received, but can provide more flexibility
The use of audio from within programs has been implemented as well. The ability
for a computer to reproduce a more human like voice has shown positive effect in quality
of answers given by school aged children to questions regarding drug and sexual activity
(Black & Ponirakis, 2000). The children reported higher instances of drug and sexual
were presented in a paper and pencil format. The use a computer produced voice has also
shown benefits with students learning social skills in which the text was read with the
corresponding picture and target actions, but the quality of the computer generated voice
comes into question (Dawson et al., 2000; Hagiwara & Myles, 1999).
Writing. Two studies were found that stated specific computer use within a writing
intervention used on the students. In Graham & MacArthur's (1988) small subject study,
students were taught a self-instructional strategy in order to improve the length and
quality of a written product. Three students participated in this multiple baseline study.
The students were presented the strategy on the computer. Once the strategy was
Computers and Special Education 11
mastered, the students produced handwritten essays. The strategy instruction appeared to
The other study involved the use of two different types of word processors and
looked at the resulting entered essays (Bahr et al., 1996). This study examined the effect
of word processing programs that included a greater amount of helping and graphical
cues for the student’s writing versus word processors that focused more on typing the
writing sample with no visual cues from the program. The students reported higher levels
of frustration with the more complex program. The writing samples were longer in length
and the students spent a larger amount of time typing in the simpler program.
vocabulary interventions, one of the reviewed studies specifically looked at the use a CAI
use to build vocabulary skills. A master list of 50 words was divided into different
amounts for presentation to the two groups. One group would have no more than 10
words per day and the other group had no more than 25 words presented per day. The
students with learning disabilities, receiving resource room support, were randomly
divided between the two conditions. This study was more focused on the amount of the
words presented per day rather than the influence of the technology on the students. The
type of activities mentioned used within the CAI were a series of multiple choice type
activities involving filling in the missing word in the sentence, identification of the
synonym and the antonym, and the use of arcade style game.
aloud showed to have higher incidence of words read correctly per minute and words
read correctly in total per session (Dawson et al., 2000). Within the study, a total of four
Computers and Special Education 12
disorder (EBD) participated in a multiple treatment design. The design included (a) no
modeling / reading out loud independently, (b) reading out loud with the computer
simulated male voice, and (c) reading out loud with the teacher. While the result indicate
that the student performed better with the teacher, the performance with the computer
was significantly better than the independent reading. The use of the computer generated
voice was a built in function of the computers used in the study and no changes were
indicated to make the computer voice sound any more or less human-like than what was
present in the original systems. The authors did discuss that the digitized sound from the
computer voice was a limitation, but did not appear to have an adverse effects on the
students.
Within Hall et al. (2000) review of CAI interventions for reading and students
with learning disabilities, the 17 studies examined showed that CAI can provide support
to students who need help with further developing their skills. However, the review also
reinforces that the human element of teacher interaction and instruction is not
recommended to be removed from the instruction. While CAI can provide specific
practice for individual students, the need for a teacher to guide the instruction and
learning of the student remains a key piece in the overall practice of reading
development.
word problems included three studies involving CAI type interventions (Jitendra & Xin,
1997). Two of these studies involved comparing a CAI presentation verses a teacher
directed instruction. The third study involved different varieties of CAI including
Computers and Special Education 13
animated or static pictures presented during the strategy instruction, and a control group
with static pictures on a computer and not presenting the strategy. The three studies
presented showed that CAI is a viable means to provide instruction for solving math word
problems. Some concerns discussed included the type of curriculum design that is
presented in the CAI or in the classroom and how well the two presentations are able to
work together. Another concern included the teachers and the students having the
students receiving EBD services found one study dealing specifically with a CAI math
intervention (Hodge, Riccomini, Buford, & Herbst, 2006). The identified study examined
the results between using paper and pencil and a CAI drill and practice program to
complete basic computation review sets. The review does not describe the program used
within the study, but does mention that the outcome of the study had the students
preferring the use of the paper and pencil. This preference was speculated because there
was not any set reinforcement within the program and the students were able to perform
Spelling. The use of CAI in the context of a spelling intervention was explored in
one small population study and a review on spelling interventions which included nine
have little effect on the students (G. Fitzgerald et al., 1986). The program used in the
study had the students copy the word requested to spell and, after the word was correctly
copied, the student spelled the word with out the model. The teachers provided a
Computers and Special Education 14
traditional approach, as defined by the study, of saying the word and having the students
write the word. There was also a control section of students that did not receive any
spelling intervention during the study. The outcome of the study showed that the results
of the CAI and the teacher presentation method showed little difference between the two.
Both of the intervention methods showed higher levels of correctly spelled words than
those students in the control group. While these results do not present a better means of
testing student’s knowledge of spelling, the use of the CAI intervention was noted to free
studies that had a computer based or computer assisted instruction. Positive effects were
reported on interventions that examined: (a) individual spelling instruction, (b) time delay
word spelling, (c) providing positive computer activities, (d) increasing on-task rates
during spelling practice activities, and (e) error elimination and modeling. Within the
found dealing specifically with issues presented in special education learning areas such
Use of a computer program to help cue a second grade student with EBD on
population study (G. E. Fitzgerald & Werner, 1996). The student was trained to use the
program as means of communicating with the teacher about what happened to cause the
behavior and to provide a framework for writing a mediation statement. The program was
based on a flashcard type system with choices of the desired classroom behavior and the
Computers and Special Education 15
undesired classroom behavior. The flashcards employed the use of language at the level
of the student as well as graphics to illustrate content of the cards. After making choices
regarding the desired behavior, the student had to write a mediation statement to the
teacher. This program showed a marked change in the amount of aggressive behaviors
across 25 school days. This system was also in place with a behavioral plan including
earning points for positive behaviors and the use of the computer to produce the
Another study involving the use of the same type of computer program showed
positive results in elementary aged students with autism learning the social skills of
appropriate hand washing and on-task behavior (Hagiwara & Myles, 1999). The program
incorporated a customized social story for the desired behaviors. The vocabulary was
crafted to the student’s level and pictures of the student themselves performing the task.
With each student that used the program, there appeared to be a trend to consistently
perform the desired tasks. Generalization of the behaviors was not reached during the
A similar method was used to work with students with high incidence disabilities
in a high school setting for learning a self-advocacy strategy (Lancaster et al., 2002). The
strategy examined by the study was designed and intended to help students with
individual education plan meetings and how to advocate for the student’s needs and
desires for goals and service planning for the next school year. The program used in this
instance made use of hypertext and allowed the student to move backward and forward
within the training modules. This program also had video and audio clips to guide and
explain what each section was about. The interactive hypertext program was compared to
Computers and Special Education 16
live instruction as well as to a control group with no strategy instruction. The results
indicated that the computerized strategy instruction had very similar results to that of the
live instruction. The results also stated that less direct teaching time was spent with the
students in the computerized instruction group (m = 68 min.) than the live instruction
group (m = 163 min.) by a significant amount. Both groups had a similar amount of total
Discussion
This review examined the changing interface of computers throughout the past
four decades and looked at the use of computers within the classroom as a means of
intervention and looked. The interface between the student and the computer has moved
from a command line interface based entirely on text and knowledge of computer syntax
to a graphical user interface based on icons and is considered to be more intuitive for
students when using computers. The use of computer as an intervention tool was found
across multiple subject categories including math, spelling, reading, writing, and within
the specific special education areas. These interventions were reported to generally have
positive effects with the students for each intervention area when compared to the results
tended to have similar results to that of the teacher lead intervention. These results across
studies indicate that computer interventions for common subject areas within high-
The use of computers within the school setting has been looked at for application
services. The application of computer programs to support students has shown potential
Computers and Special Education 17
as a viable resource for reinforcing and maintaining knowledge and strategy use by the
student. However, the generalization that the use of computers are as beneficial to
skills and strategies is not yet founded within the current literature. For this current
review, the studies and reviews cited tended to use small populations within a multiple
The studies and reviews examined that showed positive results mentioned an
element of customization that was applied to the program in order to meet the needs and
match the academic abilities of the participating students. Understanding and adapting to
what the student’s needs are appears to be a common factor for a potential successful use
of a computer program within a special education population. This idea of a student first
focus is also one of the key underpinnings for how to approach any intervention for a
students, a few logistical issues need to be addressed (Jitendra & Xin, 1997). The areas to
student’s special education needs are (a) the cost of the hardware (i.e., computer, monitor,
keyboard, mouse) and the application software, (b) the teacher training and willingness to
integrate into the classroom routine, (c) the teaching of the fundamental skills for running
the computer to the teacher and the student, and (d) managing student behavior.
student’s educational level and ability to use the computer and the program need to be
carefully examined by the teacher. The movement from a beginning level student on the
Computers and Special Education 18
computer to a more competent level should be monitored and mentored (Alcalde et al.,
1998). The definitions within the program and the graphical metaphors used for the
learning environment presented within the computer intervention are main areas to
address with the student (Brandon & Hollingshead, 1999). The teacher needs to be aware
of how the program is presented and what areas might need more direct guidance before
This brings forth another issue with the presentation of a computer intervention.
The teacher needs to know how well the program presents the material intended to be
presented to the student (Johnston, 1987). Understanding the strengths and limitations of
a program takes some advanced planning and time to figure out if the program will fit
with needs of the students. Also, the teachers needs to understand if there are any
customization options within the program and how those options might be applied to fit
Future research into computer interventions serving students with high incidence
disabilities needs to examine the following issues (a) how the changing interface of
computers has impacted the amount of time students have been presented with computer
interventions, (b) the amount of training time needed for a teacher to integrate a computer
intervention into their repertoire for students receiving special education services, and (c)
how the advertised product of a computer intervention compares to the actual use within
While computer interventions are seen as a means to save time and energy for the
teacher, there is still much to learn about the impact of the interventions and their effect.
Computers do provide a means for applying and further development of concepts, but the
Computers and Special Education 19
power they have does not quite match that of human presentation and reinforcement at
least as of yet.
Computers and Special Education 20
References
Alcalde, C., Navarro, J. I., Marchena, E., & Ruiz, G. (1998). Acquisition of basic
Antonietti, A., & Giorgetti, M. (2006). Teachers' beliefs about learning from multimedia
Bahr, C. M., Nelson, N. W., Van Meter, A., & Yanna, J. V. (1996). Children's use of
Blok, H., van Daalen-Kapteijns, M. M., Otter, M. E., & Overmaat, M. (2001). Using
Brady, E. H., & Hill, S. (1984). Young children and microcomputers: Research issues and
Bryant, D. P., Goodwin, M., Bryant, B. R., & Higgins, K. (2003). Vocabulary instruction
Campbell, P. H., Milbourne, S., Dugan, L. M., & Wilcox, M. J. (2006). A review of
3.
Cotton, J. W., Gallagher, J. P., & Marshall, S. P. (1978). A multimethod generative CAI
Dawson, L., Venn, M. L., & Gunter, P. L. (2000). The effects of teacher versus computer
Fitzgerald, G., Fick, L., & Milich, R. (1986). Computer-assisted instruction for students
19(6), 376.
Computers and Special Education 22
Fitzgerald, G. E., & Werner, J. G. (1996). The use of the computer to support cognitive-
Fulk, B. M., & Stormont-Spurgin, M. (1995). Spelling interventions for students with
488.
Graham, S., & MacArthur, C. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at
Hagiwara, T., & Myles, B. S. (1999). A multimedia social story intervention: Teaching
skills to children with autism [Electronic version]. Focus on Autism and Other
Hall, T. E., Hughes, C. A., & Filbert, M. (2000). Computer assisted instruction in reading
Hodge, J., Riccomini, P. J., Buford, R., & Herbst, M. H. (2006). A review of instructional
students with mild disabilities and students at risk for math failure; a research
Lancaster, P. E., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2002). The development and
117.
Tenney, R. A., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (1990). Elementary age special education students
Woodward, J., & Rieth, H. (1997). A historical review of technology research in special