A major objective of Academic Development Programmes is to support the student in acquiring a level of language competence which is sufficient to enable the student to cope with the linguistic demands of academic courses. Language teaching programmes in the Academic Development context in South Africa suffer from a number of constraints: staffing, time on task, relevance, and difficulty of integration with learning in other coUrses. A review of developments in the field of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) shows that computers can be used to support language learning. CALL materials range from simple instructional programs to powerful linguistic research tools and need to be integrated into wider language programmes so as to support and enhance other teaching and learning activities. However, relatively little research has been done to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of CALL in language development courses within Academic Development programmes in South Africa. The development of a system designed to enable students to practise proof-reading and editing is described and evaluated. Suggestions are made for using this system with other CALL materials within a computer assisted language development environment. It is argued that CALL can be used feasibly and effectively in this environment to enhance learning and to counteract constraints.

Professionals in education continue to explore technology as a way to instruct young students, and there is an accompanying belief that this technology can make an educational and academic difference. Despite the high percentage of young students in classrooms using technology, the impact of this technology on the early literacy skills of young children remains largely unknown. Guided by Vygotsky’s social learning theory, this study reports a 24-week investigation on whether regular use of Istation®, an integrated learning system used by approximately 3,000,000 students in the United States, had an effect on the early literacy achievement of children in twelve kindergarten classrooms. A mixed-method, quasi-experimental design was constructed using propensity scores. Also investigated were the effects of the level of teacher literacy support on early literacy achievement and the interaction between Istation® use and the level of teacher literacy support. A descriptive discriminant analysis was performed to determine the main effect of Istation®. The level of teacher support and the interaction effect was then tested using a multivariate between-subject analysis. Results indicated that Istation® did have a statistically significant effect on the early literacy skills of the 72 kindergarten students studied and was able to explain 17.7% of the variance in group differences. Hearing and recording sounds and letter sound knowledge were the main contributors to group differences. Teacher literacy support and the interaction between teacher support and Istation were not significant. This study considers the relationship between technology and early literacy and concludes that Istation® can serve as a more knowledgeable other as students develop some early literacy skills; however, teachers are still needed to provide complete literacy instruction for young students.

The study examined the literacy practices, general resources, and technological tools being used by parents to promote literacy at home. The primary purpose was to determine if differences existed in the literacy practices used by parents of preschool children with and without disabilities. The study also sought to determine if the age and education of parents had any effect upon the literacy practices utilized by parents.The population for the study consisted of 384 parents from six counties in Indiana. Each participant had a child between the ages of 3- to 6-years old who attended a preschool program. Over half of the participants had a child with disabilities. Preschool administrators who were selected for the study distributed the data-collection instrument, Parent's Views on Literacy Survey, which was developed by the researcher. The survey instrument consisted of demographic questions that addressed the study's independent variables and 20 questions that were designed to act as the study's dependent variables. The questions pertained to the types of literacy activities being provided in the home.A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed and a significant difference between parents of preschool children with disabilities and parents of preschool children without disabilities was determined. Parents of preschool children without disabilities used significantly more general literacy practices and literacy activities using technology. There was a significant difference in the types of activities and in the quantity of activities provided. It was also determined that the differences were not due to the factors of age or education of the parents. The second part of the questionnaire directed questions specifically to parents of preschool children with disabilities. The type of disability of the child, the types of assistive technology (AT), and the frequency in which AT was utilized to promote literacy activities were identified. A simple cross tabulation between the types of disabilities and the categories of AT revealed that there were also differences among the categories of AT used and disability types.Three open-ended questions were used to determine additional information about parents' literacy practices. The data collected was stratified and analyzed for emergent themes. Parents of typically developing children reported the need for more technological tools and resources while parents of preschool children with disabilities reported that more information on specific skill development was needed. Furthermore, parents of preschool children with disabilities expressed the belief that the greatest barrier for their child in developing literacy skills related to factors that were associated with the disability. It was also determined that parents of children with disabilities underutilized assistive technology devices for facilitating literacy skills.This research further supports the differences in the literacy practices among parents. Parents of preschool children without disabilities use general literacy practices and technological literacy practices with greater frequency than do the parents of preschool children with disabilities. / Department of Special Education