Reading rate and comprehension as a function of presentation mode (computerized vs. traditional) and processing speed

In a counterbalanced treatment design, 12 elementary school aged children read under two conditions: a) independent, silent, and with mentor help as necessary; and b) computer assisted, with visual and auditory delivery of text (via Kurzweil 3000). A repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed no significant difference in the composite mean for their comprehension and reading rate scores based on presentation strategy (F (2,9) = 1. 10, p = .3 7). Results from this MANOV A also revealed no significant difference in the composite mean of comprehension and reading rate scores based on students' processing speed (F (2,9) = .20, p = .82). The presentation mode x processing speed interaction effect was not statistically significant (F (2,9) = .34, p = . 72). Results from a 2 x 2 analysis of variance (ANOV A) show that comprehension did not vary as a function of manipulating the speed of computerized reading rate (F (1,10) = .01, p = .94), nor were there significant differences between fast and slow processors' comprehension scores (F ( 1, 10) = .33, p = .58). Similarly, the presentation speed x processing speed interaction effect was not statistically significant (F ( 1, 10) = 1.27, p = .29). Computerized presentation proved no more effective than traditional remedial reading instruction for teacher-nominated weak readers. Perhaps the choice of whether to use traditional or computerized remedial support should be determined by considerations such as cost, accessibility of person power for mentoring vs. technology, readers' personal preferences, etc. rather than effectiveness.