1

Literacy App Evaluation Tool for Teachers:

Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Apps Rubric (PAPER)

Dr. Peggy S. Lisenbee

Assistant Professor of Early Childhood Development and Education

Department of Family Sciences

Texas Woman’s University

Denton, TX

plisenbee@twu.edu

2

Abstract

It is challenging for teachers to select phonemic awareness and phonics applications (apps) for

students’ literacy skill practice in a classroom. Teachers often choose apps in a “one size fits all”

manner when selecting apps due, in part, to time constraints and the large number of literacy

apps available. A rubric, Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Evaluation Rubric (PAPER), was

created to align with best practices in app design and pedagogy to assist with evaluation and

selection of literacy apps. Second-grade teachers, preservice teachers, and university faculty

evaluated 20 literacy apps using PAPER to determine the effectiveness of PAPER to identify

literacy apps. Teachers and faculty found PAPER to be an evaluation tool assisting them in

identifying effective literacy apps efficiently.

3

Classroom Literacy Skill Practice Using Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Apps

Technology changes the way literacy can be taught since students can use tablets in

classrooms to access software applications, or “apps," to independently practice literacy skills.

These apps offer interaction and engagement with technology in appealing methods using mobile

devices to extend learning in a classroom. In fact, few technologies have shown the potential to

motivate, engage or interact with students during the teaching and learning process as much as

apps created for use on tablets (Hutchison, Beschorner & Schmidt-Crawford, 2012; Karchmer-

Klein & Harlow Shinas, 2012; Neumann & Neumann, 2014; Ritchie, 2014; Shuler, Levine, &

Ree, 2012; Thoermer & Williams, 2012; Yokata & Teale, 2014). Tablets are highly interactive

and as such can motivate some students to practice literacy skills beyond small group instruction

in a classroom. Changes in technology in education and society in the 21st Century have been

vast. The implications for teachers regarding literacy have changed from “if” technology can

offer practice on literacy skills to “how” effective apps can be selected for literacy skill practice

in a classroom.

Technology Changes Practice

The prevalence of using tablets for educational activities is strong even though tablets

have only been available since 2010. The iPad was unveiled in January 2010 boasting “most of

the capabilities of a desktop or laptop computer, but with the additional unique affordances, such

as a multi-touch screen….” (p. 15), making the iPad distinctive from other technological devices

at that time (Hutchison et al., 2012). By April 2011, over 15 million iPads were sold, and the

iTunes App Store offered over 65,000 apps specifically designed for use on the iPad (Ritchie,

2014). Comparatively, by January 2015, apps designed for use on the iPad were 725,000 out of

the 1.4 million apps available through the iTunes App Store (Monaghan, 2015). Over 10% of all

4

apps downloaded from the iTunes App Store were from the Education category which is second

only to the number of app downloads in the Games category (Statista, 2015; Walker, 2011).

IPads and their apps are but one option among several choices for tablets. There has been

an exponential proliferation of literacy apps and models of tablets since 2010. Tablet use in the

classroom has the potential to emerge as the foremost tool used in teaching and learning (Cahill

& McGill-Franzen, 2013; Hutchison et al., 2012; Karchmer-Klein & Harlow-Shinas, 2012;

Mallette & Barone, 2014; Neumann & Neumann, 2014; Shuler, Levin & Ree, 2012; Smith,

2012; Thoermer & Williams, 2012; Yokota & Teale, 2014). Cell phones have caught up with

the mobility of the tablet and its computing capabilities but tablets continue to be the prominent

mobile device used in education due to the multitude of apps specifically designed for student

use (Hutchison et al., 2012; Pressman & Pietrzyk, 2014; Smith, 2012).

Students interact using the unique capabilities of a tablet’s touch screen by pinching,

stretching and double tapping as they practice literacy skills in apps (Hutchison et al., 2012;

Neumann & Neumann, 2014). Quality apps scaffold students’ literacy skills by independently

completing literacy activities offering immediate and corrective feedback to improve their

understanding of literacy skills. Skill and drill literacy apps don't provide feedback to correct

mistakes which might promote possible errors in reading skills. It is important to select quality

literacy apps with practice on specific phonological skills, clearly defined goals, and options for

differentiation so effective literacy instruction can be offered to students on a tablet (Cavanaugh,

2007; Karchmer-Klein & Harlow Shinas, 2012; Thoermer & Williams, 2012).

The Secretary’s Conference on Educational Technology (2000) supports the notion that

curricular integration with technology increases personal motivational outcomes and student

achievement as well as prepares students for the 21st Century (McComb, 2000). Although the

5

National Reading Panel Report (2000) is over a decade old, it still provides the basis for best

practices in literacy instruction. The National Reading Panel (2000) reported technology “can be

used to deliver a variety of types of reading instruction successfully” (p. 6-9). Apps targeting

vocabulary, comprehension, decoding, and word meanings are considered best reading

instructional practices even if practiced in a digital learning environment using a tablet

(Anderson, Grant & Speck, 2008; Roskos & Neuman, 2014). In 2009, the International Reading

Association’s (IRA, now ILA) position statement specified for teachers to remain abreast of

“best practices for using technology in instruction to enhance students’ literacy learning” (p. 4).

The International Society of Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards for Educators (2017)

provide a framework for effectively using digital tools in classrooms as a way to remain

connected to an increasingly technological society. To prepare students with 21st Century skills,

the Internet, personal and motivational outcomes, challenging educational standards, and high

achievement need to align with best practices in pedagogy. Together, both IRA and ISTE

support teachers selecting and evaluating a variety of technological tools to enrich the pedagogy

in their classrooms.

Selecting Literacy Apps to Use in the Classroom

The ever-increasing number of literacy apps for tablets seem to present enumerable ways

for teachers to extend literacy skill practice in the classroom (Pressman & Pietrzyk, 2014). Yet,

how do teachers evaluate quality, educational apps? What criteria, beyond focusing on best

practices for literacy instruction, assist in selecting apps? Quality apps need to align with

pedagogical best practices and app design elements to focus on creating an effective app for

learning. Neumann & Neumann (2014) recommended nine app design elements for evaluating

literacy apps, which also support pedagogy:

6

1. App is clearly aligned with developmentally appropriate curriculum targeting literacy

skills at appropriate intervals.

2. App uses interactivity to engage the senses.

3. App uses background knowledge to scaffold students as they work through the app.

4. App provides opportunities to problem solve, use higher order questioning and supports

creativity.

5. App uses print and meaning-making to support students constructing knowledge of

contexts when reading.

6. App clearly explains tasks to complete.

7. App offers peer collaboration opportunities.

8. App offers feedback immediately so students don’t proceed with incorrect information

and can revisit content to confirm, clarify and construct accurate knowledge.

9. App utilizes scaffolding to encourage student-centered interaction instead of rote

memorization of answers.

Neumann & Neumann’s (2014) nine design elements embrace Smith’s research. Smith (2012)

stated that tablets and literacy apps offer the potential for sustaining student interest when apps

were comprised of several factors, namely, developmentally appropriate content, fun activities,

incentives, clearly defined goals, and abbreviated wait times. Both Neumann & Neumann’s

(2014) and Smith's (2012) research are clearly combined with best pedagogical practices offering

a framework to utilize in creating a literacy apps rubric to select and evaluate literacy apps.

Research supports the need to develop a literacy apps rubric focused on identifying specific

phonological skills offered for practice in apps so students could be assigned a phonemic

7

awareness or phonics app appropriate for their independent practice (Darrow, 2011; Neumann &

Neumann, 2014; Roskos & Neuman, 2014; Schuler et al., 2012; Van Daal, 2009).

Phonemic Awareness & Phonics Evaluation Rubric (PAPER)

The Phonemic Awareness & Phonics Evaluation Rubric (PAPER) was developed as a

tool for identifying and evaluating specific literacy skills available for students’ independent

practice in literacy apps. A checklist of literacy skills was created by merging the Phonics

Developmental Continuum from the Literacy First Framework (n.d.) with Fountas & Pinnell’s

Word Study Continuum (2003). This merged checklist of phonemic awareness and phonics

skills is provided in Figure 1. The checklist offers teachers an opportunity to identify isolated

phonemic awareness and phonics literacy skill(s) available for independent practice in each app

by using PAPER to evaluate the effectiveness of each literacy app.

Figure 1. Checklist of Literacy Skills

PAPER was aligned with Neumann & Neumann's best practices in pedagogical and app

design features to form six criteria evaluated in PAPER. The alignment of PAPER's six criteria

and Neumann & Neumann's research is illustrated in Table 1. In viewing Table 1, it is clear that

the six criteria are aligned with pedagogy, app design, and best practices in literacy.

Table 1. Alignment of Criteria Evaluated in PAPER

The six criteria created for PAPER are: Literacy Skills, Engaging, Immediate Feedback,

Flexibility & Adaptations, Independence with Technology and Remained Focused on Literacy.

The definitions for each of the six criteria in PAPER are provided below:

1. Literacy Skills—Phonemic awareness and phonics skills offered for practice in apps are

specific literacy skills. Isolated literacy skills evaluated for PAPER are defined as one or

two literacy skills available for practice in an app. Apps which provided practice on three

or more literacy skills are evaluated by PAPER as offering a range of literacy skills for

8

practice in an app. The phonemic awareness and phonics skills listed in the checklist are

typical prerequisites for becoming a fluent reader.

2. Engaging—Literacy skills practiced in apps in an authentic manner are more engaging to

students than skill and drill practice based on the context of the learning environment in

each app. Tasks completed in the app are appropriate for learning and keep students

absorbed in practicing the literacy skills in each app.

3. Immediate Feedback—Feedback provided within each app is specific enough for

students to confirm their understanding of literacy skill(s). Feedback offers a chance for

students to try to correct any mistake in their knowledge of the literacy skill(s) before

students are allowed to move on in the app.

4. Flexibility and Adaptations—Students interact within each app by making their own

choices to discover and practice literacy skills. The option for teachers to alter settings

within apps offers a way to customize and adapt to individual students’ needs and offers

ways to work with peers.

5. Independence with Technology—Students can launch and navigate through each app in

an independent manner without needing teacher assistance or experience frustration.

6. Remained Focused on Literacy—Students are able to remain focused on practicing

literacy skill(s) without having to avoid ads/links forcing them to consider upgrading to a

complete version of the game. Hopefully, free literacy apps were identified and

evaluated to offer to students for independent literacy skill practice.

Teachers are, inherently, constrained by time which ends up being a double edged sword as

teachers attempt to embrace using technology, such as tablets, in their classrooms. Time

constraints overwhelm many teachers causing them to choose a specific number of apps for all

9

students to use when practicing literacy skills on a tablet even if these apps might be above or

below students’ literacy skill levels. PAPER provides an evaluation tool for teachers to identify

phonemic awareness and phonics skills practiced in each app and select a variety of appropriate

apps to use in their classroom.

Table 2. Phonemic Awareness & Phonics Evaluation Rubric (PAPER)

PAPER was created with the end goal in mind of easily sharing scores from PAPER with

other teachers across the hall, across town, and ultimately, across the globe through an Excel

spreadsheet maintained online. The author created a website listing PAPER, the definitions of

the six criteria, and a current list of literacy apps evaluated using PAPER for teachers to utilize in

their classrooms, https://plisenbee.wixsite.com/website. Teachers are encouraged to assist in the

evaluation of literacy apps by submitting additional literacy app evaluations to the author to

update the list online. Through concerted efforts evaluating apps using PAPER, teachers are able

to select a wider variety of appropriate literacy apps focused on specific, isolated literacy skills.

Since apps proliferate so quickly, the online listing of literacy apps evaluated by PAPER

includes the date, an image of the app icon, and the current cost of each app. The creation of

PAPER offers a tool to efficiently and effectively identify, evaluate, and collaborate with

teachers world-wide on current effective literacy apps.

Analysis of Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Apps

My research was conducted using a systematic content analysis of literacy apps available

in the iTunes App Store by searching the Education category using the terms, “Phonics” and

“Phonemic Awareness.” A second systematic content analysis of each of the identified apps was

completed by sorting for “Free” apps. After playing the identified apps, it was found that some

free apps were only free for a “trial period” before being required to upgrade with an in-app

purchase. “Free” apps offering in-app purchases after a trial period were included in the content

10

analysis. Research in the iTunes App Store continued until ten free literacy apps marketed to

practice phonemic awareness skills and ten free literacy apps marketed to practice phonics skills

were identified. A screenshot of the 20 literacy app icons is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2. App Icons of Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Apps Analyzed

Content Analysis

Twenty literacy apps were evaluated using the four-point Likert scale embedded in

PAPER, offering a range of rubric scores from 6-24. PAPER scores of 24-22 were determined to

be exemplary literacy apps, scores of 21-20 were associated with excellent literacy apps, scores

of 19-17 were considered adequate literacy apps, scores of 16-12 were determined to need

improvement, and scores of 11-6 were associated with literacy apps that were not effective.

These ratings were calculated using the PAPER score closest to each of these typical grading

percentages: 90% (exemplary), 80% (excellent), 70% (adequate), 60% (needs improvement),

and 50% (not effective).

Two phonemic awareness apps, Reading Magic 1 and Professor Phonics, earned

exemplary scores of 23 and 22, respectively. There was only one phonics app evaluated as

exemplary which was Sky Fish with a score of 24. Two phonemic awareness apps, LITERACY

and Rhyming Bee, were evaluated as excellent literacy apps while one phonics app, Build A

Word Express, was rated as an excellent literacy app. Apps evaluated as exemplary and

excellent scored highest on PAPER criteria focused more significantly on app design features

and pedagogical tenets such as Literacy, Engaging, Immediate Feedback, and Independence with

Technology.

Table 3. PAPER Scores of Phonological Skills Identified in Apps

11

Four phonemic awareness apps were evaluated as adequate using PAPER with scores

ranging from 19-17, ABC Magic 6, Phonics Island, Hear 2 Read Lite, and Fun Rhyming. Three

phonics apps, Reading Magic 2, ABC Genius, and Little Speller, had adequate scores ranging

between 19-17 as evaluated by PAPER. Only two phonemic awareness apps were evaluated as

needing improvement with PAPER scores of 16 and 14, ABC Magic and Letter Sounds,

respectively. Five phonics apps earning scores between 14-16 by PAPER and were evaluated as

needing improvement were Phonics Vowels, Tic Tac Toe, Phonics Genius, Phonics Awareness,

and Literacy!.

Table 4 provides a visual display of the similarities and differences in scores for

phonemic awareness and phonics apps evaluated by PAPER. Phonics apps were evaluated as

having consistently lower scores overall even though one phonics app achieved a perfect score of

24 from PAPER. Phonemic awareness apps had consistently higher scores from PAPER.

Analyzing data from both Tables 3 and 4 seems to suggest that phonemic awareness apps

focused on isolated literacy skills while phonics apps focused on offering practice on a range of

literacy skills. Also, further analysis of Tables 3 and 4 found that 40% of the phonemic

awareness apps scored as excellent or higher while only 20% of phonics apps scored as excellent

or above.

Table 4. Analysis of PAPER Ratings of Literacy Apps

Students’ Analysis

Kindergarten to 2nd Grade students were offered iPads to use with 20 literacy apps

uploaded for their use on the iPads. After leaving the iPads in the classrooms for one month, the

students were interviewed about their favorite literacy apps. The favorite phonemic awareness

apps shared by students were Professor Phonics, Hear 2 Read Lite, ABC Magic 6, Phonics

12

Island, LITERACY, Reading Magic 1, and Rhyming Bee. The favorite phonics apps shared by

students were Phonics Genius, Sky Fish, Tic Tac Toe, and Little Speller.

Three phonemic awareness apps, Professor Phonics, LITERACY, and Rhyming Bee

were rated as exemplary by PAPER and was deemed as a favorite of students. Only one phonics

app, Sky Fish, was a favorite of students and evaluated by PAPER as exemplary. Some of the

detailed comments made by students were "I can make the train move," "It's fun," "It has

stickers," "You get to change his clothes," and "We get to choose our own character." Student

comments about their favorite apps seemed to be based off of the interactive and engaging

features embedded in the app design and identified in PAPER criteria (Engaging, Immediate

Feedback, and Independence with Technology). Six of the 11 favorite apps had in-app purchases

which seems to imply that students were able to enjoy and disregard the links to ads while

utilizing an app.

Teachers’ Analysis

Kindergarten to 2nd Grade teacher comments obtained after letting students use tablets for

independent literacy practice in their classrooms ranged from holding a different perspective of

technology integration to having an appreciation of technology support. Some of the comments

were, “I learned how valuable technology can be!,” “…I realized how important it is to take

advantage of technology in my own classroom to allow students more choices....,” “I think the

rubric looks really good,” and “…it will be a useful tool moving forward." Teachers shared their

pleasure in observing students focused on practicing literacy skills while having fun and

learning. Teachers seemed appreciative of students using literacy apps and comments about

planning to use PAPER to select and evaluate more apps suggest that a collaborative list of apps

13

evaluated by PAPER would be helpful and beneficial for teachers integrating technology into

their classrooms.

PAPER Analysis

The Independence with Technology criteria scored the highest in all phonemic

awareness and phonics apps evaluated by PAPER. Students need to feel confident navigating on

tablets, but more importantly, students need to be able to launch and navigate through an app

without frustration as they try to practice literacy skills.

For all phonemic awareness and phonics apps evaluated by PAPER, the one criteria

which scored the lowest in all literacy apps was Flexibility and Adaptations. It would be ideal

for students to make individual choices as they construct their understanding of a literacy skill or

for teachers to make adaptations for individual students. Yet, it was not included in most literacy

apps assessed for this research.

Overall, the six criterion evaluated using PAPER seemed to be appropriate for assessing

quality literacy apps. Literacy Skills, Engaging, Immediate Feedback, Flexibility and

Adaptations, Independence with Technology, and Remained Focused on Literacy Skills support

the use of PAPER as an evaluation tool since all criteria are considered pedagogical and app

design best practices.

Literacy Skills Analysis

Analysis of isolated literacy skills in phonemic awareness and phonics apps revealed that

most literacy apps assessed in this research focused on offering on a range of literacy skills

instead of offering practice on isolated literacy skills. Practicing a variety of literacy skills

provides direct and indirect practice for students on multiple literacy skills while independently

using literacy apps on a tablet.

14

However, teachers need to be able to select apps with isolated literacy skill(s) when

possible so students can practice specific literacy skill(s). Research by Anderson et al. (2008),

states “It is important to select electronic programs that focus on one or two types of phoneme

manipulation at a time. Young children are confused if they are exposed to more…” (p. 63).

The analysis provided in Table 3 reveals phonemic awareness apps offered isolated literacy skill

practice four out of 20 times while phonics apps focused on isolated literacy skills only one time

Also, Table 3 reveals that 13 out of 20 literacy apps had in-app purchases included in the

apps. The literacy apps with in-app purchases are visually depicted in Table 3 with this symbol,

*. Further analysis of literacy skills offered for practice in all 20 apps evaluated by PAPER

provided additional insights shared in Table 5. Table 5 offers a visual display of horizontally

stacked bar graphs detailing the range of literacy skills offered for practice in the phonemic

awareness and phonics apps evaluated by PAPER.

Table 5. Analysis of Literacy Skills Offered For Practice in 20 Literacy Apps

Two literacy skills, letter recognition and consonants, was targeted for practice in 90% of

the apps analyzed by PAPER. Short vowels was the only other literacy skill commonly practiced

in 50% of the phonemic awareness apps and 90% of the phonics apps evaluated by PAPER.

These literacy skills are listed by Fountas & Pinnell (2003) and Literacy First (n.d.) as beginning

phonological skills so it seems that PAPER identified apps with appropriate literacy skill practice

to master beginning literacy skills.

Literacy skills analyzed as being offered for practice more than 50% of the time in apps

assessed using PAPER focused on these six phonological skills: letter recognition, consonants,

short vowels, long vowels, CVC patterns, and onset & rime. These literacy skills represent

common phonological skills typically projected for mastery in kindergarten and first grade

15

(Fountas & Pinnell, 2003; Literacy First, n.d.) suggesting that PAPER identified literacy skills

appropriate for beginning readers.

In contrast, literacy skills analyzed 15-45% of the apps evaluated by PAPER were

phonics skills mastered typically by the end of 1st grade or the beginning of 2nd grade. These

phonics skills include digraphs, blends, diphthongs, and r & l-controlled vowels which assist

students in becoming proficient readers by the end of 3rd grade (Fountas & Pinnell, 2003;

Literacy First, n.d.).

Although opportunities to practice higher level phonics skills in apps are valued, it seems

this research found that free phonemic awareness and phonics apps appear to be on Kindergarten

and first-grade level phonemic awareness and phonics skills. Searching for literacy apps using

the term “Phonics” seems to select apps with a range of literacy skills while searching for apps

using the term "Phonemic Awareness" identifies apps more often with isolated literacy skills for

practice. Generally, it seemed that these two terms were effective in searching the iTunes App

Store for literacy apps to use on tablets in a classroom to support students’ practice of literacy

skills.

Implications for Teachers

Teachers’ embrace of the rapidly changing educational focus to integrate technology in

classrooms is a way to incorporate digital literacies into their pedagogy. Karchmer-Klein &

Harlow Shinas (2012), stated, “…teachers must recognize the new literacy demands of the 21st

Century and, most important, must transform their programs to meet these demands with timely

literacy instruction” (p. 289). Teachers’ ability to efficiently and effectively integrate technology

ensures students become proficient in skills and practices needed for the 21st Century. Research

on tablets suggests high-quality apps can improve literacy skills and use of PAPER might assist

16

in identifying effective literacy apps for students’ independent practice in classrooms

(Hutchinson et al., 2012; Neumann & Neumann, 2014; Shuler et al., 2012).

Tablets are still in their infancy for use in educational settings, but “apps are rapidly

emerging as a new medium for providing educational content to children nationwide, both in

terms of their availability and popularity” (Schuler et al., 2012, p. 26). Students’ practice of

computer skills on tablets daily will ensure that their lack of computer skills did not impede their

ability to successfully navigate on a tablet. Even though most teachers don't have enough tablets

in their classrooms for 1:1 use by students, teachers can use document cameras connected to

interactive whiteboards to display the tablet screen so small groups of students can practice

literacy skills collaboratively. Using document cameras as a visual display offers teachers or

students a chance to model how to navigate on tablets and in apps before using students use

mobile devices independently in classrooms. Frustration is a dynamic deterrent to students

learning how to read so it is vital to make sure that technology does not cause additional

frustrations for students practicing literacy skills on tablets.

The cost of apps can be another challenge for teachers in selecting a variety of apps for

use in their classrooms. In 2012, the average price of children’s apps ranged from $0.99 to $1.99

(Schuler et al., 2012, p. 16). Literacy apps with embedded ads encouraging in-app purchases and

links taking students to unknown sites outside of the app on the Internet are a challenge causing

difficulty integrating apps in a classroom (Schuler et al., 2012; Yokota & Teale, 2014).

However, teachers need the option of identifying quality free apps, even free for a trial period, by

using PAPER to evaluate their effectiveness.

Lastly, teachers’ duplication of effort and time needs to be minimized so teachers can

integrate technology into classroom instruction and identify a wider variety of literacy apps for

17

use in a classroom more efficiently. Using PAPER as an evaluation tool, teachers can

synergistically evaluate apps describing specific literacy skills practiced in apps by submitting

the information to the author’s online website (https://plisenbee.wixsite.com/website).

Evaluating apps and disseminating a list of quality apps focused on isolated literacy skills not

only strengthens support for students using tablets in a classroom but can be powerful in

strengthening students mastery of literacy skills as well.

These implications suggest additional research is needed on the use of PAPER due to the

needs of 21st Century learners, the influx of using tables in classrooms, the need to identify

quality literacy apps for use in classrooms and as a means to support teachers. PAPER provides

a framework focusing on app design, literacy skills, and pedagogy supporting 21st Century

learners and teachers interested in integrating technology into their classrooms. PAPER provides

the ability to assess literacy apps beyond just using cost and marketing information provided on

the iTunes App Store. PAPER offers teachers around the world an opportunity to collaborate as

they identify and evaluate quality literacy apps.

18

References

Anderson, R. S., Grant, M. M. & Speck, B. W. (2008). Technology to teach literacy: A resource

for k-8 teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Cahill, M. & McGill-Franzen, A. (2013). Selecting “app”ealing and “app”ropriate book apps

for beginning readers. The Reading Teacher, 67(1), 30-39. doi:10.1002/TRTR.1190

Cavanaugh, T. W. (2007). Technology and phonological awareness. Florida Reading

Quarterly, 43(3), 26-30.

Darrow, D. (2011, Sept 22). K-5 iPad apps for evaluating (bloom’s revised taxonomy,

part 5). Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/ipad-apps-elementary-blooms-

taxomony-evaluating-evaluation-diane-darrow

Fountas, I. & Pinnell, G. S. (2003). The word study continuum. Retrieved from

http://assets.pearsonschool.com/asset_mgr/current/201228/word_study_continuum.pdf

Hutchison, A., Beschorner, B., & Schmidt-Crawford, D. (2012). Exploring the use of the

ipad for literacy learning, The Reading Teacher, 66(1), 15-23. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01090

International Reading Association Position Statement. (2009). New Literacies and 21st-Century

Technologies. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2017). ISTE standards for educators.

Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators#startstandards

Karchmer-Klein, R. & Harlow Shinas, V. (2012). Guiding principles for supporting new

literacies in your classroom. The Reading Teacher, 65(5), 288-293.

doi:10.1002/TRTR.01044

Literacy First (n.d.). Literacy first phonological awareness skills continuum and phonics skills

continuum. Retrieved from

19

http://www.yukonps.com/surreyhills/Home/LiteracyCorner/tabid/1850/Default.aspx

Mallette, M.H. & Barone, D. (2014). Interesting ways to use ipads in the classroom. The

Reading Teacher, 67(8), 621-625. doi:10.1002/trtr.1264

Marsh, J. (2009). Digital beginnings: Young children’s use of popular culture, media and new

technologies in homes and early years settings. In A.G. Bus & S.B. Neuman

(Eds.), Multimedia and literacy development: Improving achievement for young

learners. (pp. 28-43), New York, NY: Routledge.

McCombs, B. L. (2000). Assessing the role of educational technology in the teaching and

learning process: A learner-centered perspective. Paper presented at

the Secretary’s Conference on Educational Technology 2000, Washington, DC. Abstract

retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/techconf00/mccombs_paper.html

Monaghan, C. (2015, Jan 8). App store rings in 2015 with new records. Retrieved from

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2015/01/08App-Store-Rings-in-2015-with-New-

Records.html

National Reading Panel Report (2000). Teaching children to read. Washington, DC: National

Institute of Child Health and Development.

Neumann, M. M. & Neumann, D. L. (2014). Touch screen tablets and emergent literacy.

Early Childhood Education Journal, 42, 231-239.

Pressman, H. & Pietrzyk, A. (2014). Literacy apps for struggling learners. Retrieved from

www.education.nh.gov/instruction/special_ed/documents/apps_early_literacy.pdf

Ritchie, R. (2014, Oct 6). History of ipad (original): Apple makes the tablet magical and

revolutionary. Retrieved from http:/www.imore.com/history-ipad-2010

Roskos, K., & Neuman, S. B. (2014). Best practices in reading: A 21st century skill update.

20

The Reading Teacher, 57(7), 507-511. doi:10.1002/trtr.1248

Schuler, C., Levine, Z. & Ree, J. (2012). iLearn II: An analysis of the education category of

apples’ app store. New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.

Smith, J. (2012, March 25). iLit: Using ipads for multi-sensory literacy development

intervention. Retrieved from http://cdn-media1.teachertube.com/doc603/5791.pdf

Statista, Inc. (2015). Most popular apple app store categories in january 2015, by share of

available apps. Retrieved from

http://www.statista.com/statistics/270291/popular-categories-in-the-app-store/

Thoermer, A. & Williams, L. (2012). Using digital texts to promote fluent reading. The Reading

Teacher, 65(7), 441-445. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01065

Van Daal, V. H. P. (2009). Struggling readers and multimedia. In A. G. Bus & S. B. Neuman

(Eds.), Multimedia and literacy development: Improving achievement for young

learners. (pp. 124-134), New York, NY: Routledge.

Walker, H. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of apps for mobile devices. Journal of Special

Education Technology, 26(4), 59-63.

Yokota, J. & Teale, W.H. (2014). Picture books and the digital world. The Reading Teacher,

67(8), 577-585. doi:10.1002/trtr.1262

21

Figure 1. Checklist of Phonological Skills listed for evaluation in PAPER

PHONEMIC AWARENESS SKILLS:

Rhyming

Letter Recognition

Concept of Words

Phoneme Isolation

Phoneme Identity

Phoneme Categorization

Phoneme Blending

Phoneme Segmentation

Phoneme Deletion

PHONICS SKILLS:

Consonants

Vowels—Short

Vowels--Long

CVC Patterns

Onset & Rime

CVCe Patterns

Consonant Digraphs-Beginning

Consonant Digraphs-Ending

Consonant Blends-Beginning

Consonant Blends-Ending

Vowel Digraphs-Long

Vowel Diphthongs

R & L Controlled Vowels

22

Figure 2. App Icons of Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Apps Analyzed

Phonemic Awareness Apps Analyzed, Education Category, Apple iTunes Store

Phonics Apps Analyzed, Education Category, Apple iTunes Store

23

24

25

26

27

Table 5. Analysis of Literacy Skills Offered For Practice in 20 Literacy Apps

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Rhyming

Letter Recognition

Concept of Words

Phoneme Manipulation

Consonants

Vowels-short

Vowels-long

CVC Patterns

Onset & Rime

CVCe Patterns

Consonant Digraphs-Beginning

Consonant Digraphs-Ending

Consonant Blends-Beginning

Consonant Blends-Ending

Vowel Digraphs-Long

Vowel Diphthongs

R & L Controlled Vowels

Number of Literacy Apps Analyzed

Phonemic Awareness Apps Phonics Apps