Which of the above programs have been used in studies with kids

							                                         Text to Speech Tools                       1




Running Head: TEXT TO SPEECH TOOLS




         Text to Speech Tools: Review of Features, Applications, and Research



                                     Jinghong Tian

                                     Cynthia Okolo

                               Michigan State University

                                       June, 2007




The research reported in this paper has been supported by the National Center for

Supported Electronic Text under funding from the U.S. Department of of Education,

Office of Special Education Programs (Award # H327R050005).




                   DRAFT: Do not quote or cite without permission
                                          Text to Speech Tools                              2


                                       Introduction

       Technology offers potentially powerful solutions for helping all students meet

content-area expectations in the general education classroom. Technology-based

instructional programs can provide the extra practice and individualized instruction that

students with disabilities often need to master basic skills. Use of computers and other

technologies often proves very motivating to students who have struggled in the

classroom. However, one of the greatest benefits technology offers is its ability to

transform text. Digital texts can be read by free text reader software, such as Microsoft

Reader (www.microsoft.com/reader) and, increasingly, by text-to-speech tools built into

a computer’s operating system. Text-to-speech tools are improving continually, offering

a wider range of voice options and more sophisticated rules for making speech output

more pleasing and accurate.

       The burgeoning number of TTS tools is both a blessing and a curse. Educators,

parents, and consumers have more options, but have minimal guidance to assist them in

selecting tools to meet the needs of individual students and tasks. This paper is designed

to offer guidance by discussing types of TTS tools and features, the ways in which TTS

has been used by during instruction, and the results of studies of TTS use.

                                       Types of TTS Tools

       Two types of TTS tools are available: (a) free standing software, such as Kurzweil

3000 and (b) toolbar applications, such as Alive TTS toolbar, which work within the

programs such as Microsoft Office, email, or the web browsers (James, 2006).

       Some TTS tools are free to download; others are commercial products that can

cost hundreds of dollars. More expensive programs are usually more sophosticated and
                                            Text to Speech Tools                              3


contain more features than ones of lesser cost. For example, compared to a free version of

ReadPlease 200), the commerical version (ReadingBar) has more voice options and

makes content more accessible to students with special needs. For example, students

with visual impairment may benefit from the features of document magnification and

low-vision color control in ReadingBar. ReadingBar also offers strong language learning

functions; its multilingual feature accommodates students who learn English, German,

French, Spanish, or Japanese. However, the costly expense of some TTS tools hinder

their availability to users. On the other hand, the free versions are more affordable and

consequently, may be more readily available to a wide range of learners.

                                    Features of TTS Tools

          The following discussion offers a categorization of the features of the majority of

TTS tools. More detailed information about these features is offered in Tian and Okolo

(2007).

          Read-aloud. The read-aloud feature is that defining characteristic of TTS tools

and enables the readers to listen to text read by human- recorded or computer-generated

speech (Balajthy, 2005). Many TTS tools (e.g., CAST eReader, HelpRead, Kurzweil

3000, Read & Write, WNYY) are able to read electronic texts in a variety of formats,

including major word processing programs, PDF, email, web pages, as well as menus and

buttons. Some of them (e.g., ReadPlease PLUS 2003) are able to read texts of unlimited

size.

          TTS tools can read text aloud in several different ways by reading: (a) the whole

text from the beginning to the end, (b) from a user-determined start point to a user-

determined stop point, (c) only the selected text, or (e) the text under the cursor. The units
                                           Text to Speech Tools                                 4


of reading aloud can be syllable (Olson & Wise, 1992), subsyllable (Wise, 1992), word

(Elbro et al., 1996; Hebert & Murdock, 1994; Lundberg & Olofsson, 1993), sentence

(Borgh & Dickson, 1992), or passage (Dawson et al.; Leong, 1992; Montali &

Lewandowski, 1996).

       Highlighting. Highlighting is a second common feature of TTS tools (e.g., CAST

eReader, Kurzweil 3000, Write:OutLoud and WYNN). Words are highlighted while they

are being read. Some TTS programs conduct paragraph-by-paragraph highlighting; others

are able to do word-by-word highlighting. Some advanced TTS programs (e.g.,

Browsealoud, Kurzweil 3000, TextHelp Read & Write) allow double highlighting, which

highlights the particular word being read in one color and the section the word is from in

another color. For instance, four schemes are available in Kurzweil 3000, ten schemes in

Read & Write. In addition, WNYY provides a highlighting function for the Web

(Universal Low Vision Aids, 2007). The highlighting feature provides a visual cue for

students to focus their attention and improve their engagement in the learning process

(Allinder et al., 2001; Lewandowski, & Montali, 1996; Pisha, & Coyne, 2001).

       Adjustment and Accessibility. Examples of adjustment and accessibility features

include change of font, size, color (e.g., color of background, text, or highlighting) (e.g.,

Write:OutLoud), space (e.g., Read & Write), speech speed, pitch, pause, volume (e.g.,

IBM Home Page Reader, Read & Write, Kurzweil 3000), as well as voice (e.g., male,

female, and foreign languages) (e.g., ReadingBar). These features can make text more

accessible and easier to understand (Higgins, & Raskind, 1995), and can provide a greater

degree of individualization for struggling students (Skinner, Johnson, Larkin, Lessey, &

Glowacki, 1995). For example, the accessibility features of WYNN (e.g., filling out
                                           Text to Speech Tools                               5


forms via speaking the required contents) were designed with the assistance of special

educators and individuals with learning disabilities (e.g., dyslexia, dysgraphia, aphasia).

The target student populations who may benefit fromWYNN include students with LD,

those with attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), and English Language

Learners (ELL).

       In addition, sign language display of text in Read-e Plus can increase the

accessibility of the content to deaf and hard of hearing students. Speech input (Read &

Write), keyboard-controlled, and shortcut keys (e.g., Browsealoud, AspireREADER™ 4.0)

are particularly useful for those with physical disabilities. Test-taking tools (e.g.,

Kurzweil 3000) provide accommodations to test-takers with special needs. Moreover,

some TTS tools (e.g., Read-e TTS Browser, Read-e Plus, WYNN) offer pop-up blocker

to eliminate the distraction of advertising windows for students with ADHD.

       Literacy and Study Features. Some TTS tools (e.g., CAST eReader, Kurzweil

3000, Microsoft Reader, Read & Write, WYNN,) include features for study skills such as

spell checking, spelling error logs, word prediction, and outline creators, which are

designed to improving students’ writing performance. Other study skills such as making

annotations and dictionary use have the potential to enhance students’ vocabulary and

comprehension (e.g., Kurzweil 3000, Microsoft Reader). Additionally, pronunciation

correction and a homophones checker (e.g., Kurzweil 3000, WYNN Reader, Microsoft

Reader) may contribute to the development of decoding and fluency. Finder tools (Read

& Write Gold for PC), note taking, and bookmarks (Kurzweil 3000, WYNN Reader,

Microsoft Reader) are also valuable features to facilitate students’ academic learning. For
                                         Text to Speech Tools                             6


example, the finder tool helps students to obtain further information by searching

resources on the Internet.

       Audio File Conversion. Audio file conversion is a feature of some TTS tools (e.g.,

Read & Write Gold version only, Kurzweil 3000 PC version only). This feature converts

speech output into MP3 or WAV formats, which then can be played on a CD, DVD,

and/or MP3 player.

       Scanning-OCR feature. The scanning feature with the support of optical character

recognition (OCR) software converts print-based texts into electronic ones that can be

edited and read directly by TTS (e.g., Kurzweil 3000, Read&Write Gold). Some

advanced TTS tools (e.g., WYNN) offer fast scanning that facilitates the translation of

print-based text to a digital format.

                     Which TTS Tools do Teachers and Students use?

       Researchers have documented the positive effects of text-to-speech (TTS) on

developing students’ reading and writing skills (e.g., Disseldorp & Chambers 2002;

Higgins & Raskind, 1995) and subject matter achievement, such as science (e.g., Hecker

et al., 2002) and social studies (Cantu & Warren, 2003). The following are examples of

ways that specific TTS tools have been used with diverse learners.

Studies of TTS Use by Students

       Talking Text and IntelliTalk. Painter (2002) explored the effects of TalkingText

and IntelliTalk on promoting the reading and writing skills of two 5th graders with

learning disabilities (LD). The read-aloud features was applied to increase the

participants’ reading speed and spelling accuracy. The results demonstrated that read-
                                           Text to Speech Tools                             7


aloud effectively improved the two students’ reading speed and spelling accuracy, as well

as their attention in the learning process (Painter, 2002).

       In addition, two features of Talking Text—read-aloud and highlighting—were

used to enhance the reading comprehension of three 6th graders. They were students with

LD, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), or limited English proficiency and were reading

2-3 years below their grade level. They either had the program read and highlight the

words they did not know or had the program read the whole paragraph for them and then

they read it silently to themselves. Both features were found useful for facilitating the

participants’ reading comprehension (The WestEd RTEC, 2004).

       DECtalk. DECtalk was used to improve the reading comprehension of sixty-seven

6th, 7th, and 8th graders who were divided into two reading levels—level I: higher than

average and level II: lower than average (Leong, 1992). The study showed that online

reading with DECtalk improved the reading comprehension of the level I students to a

great extent; weaker effects, however, were identified among the level II students.

       Another study (Leong, 1995) examining the use of DECtalk demonstrated the

effectiveness of its read-aloud on enhancing comprehension of expository prose for 4th,

5th, and 6th graders. Different from the previous study (Leong, 1992), Leong (1995)

concluded that read-aloud significantly improved level II readers’ comprehension and

their motivation for learning (Leong, 1995). In addition, Wise & Olson (1994),

examining the impact of DECtalk, concluded that using DECtalk to read stories

successfully enhanced word recognition and phonological decoding of children with

reading problems.
                                         Text to Speech Tools                               8


       Read and Write (textHELP). Disseldorp and Chambers (2002) scrutinized the

roles Read and Write 5.0 played in advancing comprehension of both good and struggling

readers. They found that the TTS program promoted accuracy in answer to

comprehension questions for all participants. Furthermore, more apparent improvement

occurred among struggling readers; with the help of Read and Write 5.0, their reading

performance progressed to a level similar to the average readers (Disseldorp &

Chambers, 2002).

       Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) e-reader. Howard (2004)

investigated the impact of CAST eReader on the science learning of 1st graders. The

study focused on the TTS features of read-aloud with simultaneous highlighting. When

using these features, students had two options: to have eReader highlight and read (a) the

unfamiliar words or (b) the entire text. CAST eReader significantly improved not only

students’ comprehension and decoding but also their engagement and knowledge

maintenance. Additionally, research examining the impact of eReader on content area

learning suggested that students performed more productively on science concepts with

the support of read-aloud with simultaneous highlighting than without the use of eReader

(Hecker et al., 2002).

       Kurzweil 3000. Elkind (1998) studied Kurzweil 3000 to read text aloud for 10th

graders with or without reading problems, as well as college-level students with LD. The

research concluded that Kurzweil 3000 had positive effects on reading speed and

comprehension of the 10th graders with poor reading skills, but negative effects on those

of the good readers. As for the college-level students with LD, Kurzweil 3000 resulted in

substantial improvement in their reading speed, comprehension, and attention on their
                                          Text to Speech Tools                              9


learning tasks. Qualitative data showed that the college students preferred using Kurzweil

3000 to read text aloud for them rather than reading the text by themselves.

       Hecker, Burns, Elkind, Elkind, and Katz (2002) probed the effects of the double

highlighting of Kurzweil 3000 on college students with attention problems. Double

highlighting allowed the word being read to be highlighted in one color and the sentence

the word lies in to be highlighted in another color (Hecker, Burns, Elkind, Elkind, & Katz,

2002). The results showed that Kurzweil 3000 successfully improved attention to task and

reading speed of all participants. However, no statistically significant difference was

identified in answer accuracy of the comprehension questions between the software and

the print-based conditions.

       A case study with a 6th grader with cerebral palsy demonstrated that Kurzweil

3000’s features of read-aloud with simultaneous highlighting and sticky note features

considerably improved the participant’s reading fluency, comprehension, word

recognition, and motivation. In addition, listening to the software read his draft increased

the clarity and precision of his writings. Another case study with a college-student with

dyslexia showed that Kurzweil 3000 not only successfully improved his literacy in terms

of decoding, fluency, and comprehension, but also his content area learning in English,

History and Psychology (Kurzweil Educational Systems, 2006).

       CAST eReader, ReadPlease 2000, and Help Read. Pisha and Coyne (2001)

explored the effects of CAST eReader, ReadPlease 2000, and Help Read on social studies

learning. The TTS programs read a high school social studies text and provided flexible

highlighting—any word, sentence, or paragraph being read could be highlighted.

Students were also allowed to use the study tools of dictionary, encyclopedia, note taking,
                                            Text to Speech Tools                           10


and search support. The results showed that the read-aloud and study tools helped all

participants improve their achievement in social studies.

       TextHELP (Read & Write Gold version). Hewlett and Burnett (n. d.) studied the

effectiveness of TextHELP on the reading comprehension of college students with LD,

English language learners, and regular readers. The read-aloud and highlighting features

were applied in three ways: (a) read-aloud only (b) highlighting only, and (c) read-aloud

with simultaneously highlighting. Three conclusions were drawn from the investigation:

(a) read-aloud effectively improved all participants’ reading comprehension, but (b) the

most evident improvement was achieved when implementing read-aloud with

simultaneous highlighting, and (c) highlighting provided visual presentation of the texts

and efficiently improved the participants’ word recognition (Hewlett, & Burnett, n. d.).

When using the read-aloud feature, students controlled how TextHELP read the text—

reading each word, sentence, paragraph, or selected text. Thirty-four voices were

available in different accents of British and American English. Students were also

allowed to adjust pitch, speed, volume, and pause to meet their individual needs and

better understand the content being read.

            The Impact of TTS on Literacy Skills and Content Area Learning

       TTS tools have been found effective in helping struggling students improve

decoding (McKenna, 1998), vocabulary (Hebert & Murdock, 1994), fluency (e.g.,

Davidson et al., 1991; Dawson et al., 2000), word recognition (e.g., Olson & Wise, 1992;

Reitsma, 1988), fluency (Dawson et al., 2000; Shany & Biemiller, 1995; van Daal & van

der Leij, 1992), and comprehension (e.g., Disseldorp & Chambers 2002; Montali &

Lewandowski, 1996).
                                          Text to Speech Tools                           11


       The usefulness of TTS tools has also been recognized in helping general

education students understand texts that are more difficult than what they should be able

to understand at their grade level. For example, read-aloud with synchronous highlighting

helped a class of 2nd graders understand online texts on science (e.g., dinosaur evolution),

which were appropriate for 12th graders (the WestEd RTEC, 2004).

       In addition, research has shown that students were able to identify and correct

more errors, particularly identifying missing words, in their writings when using TTS for

proofreading (Higgins & Raskind, 1995; James, 2006). Moreover, Auld and Spagnolo,

(2007) concluded that TTS was effective in improving student self-esteem, confidence,

and motivation, which then improve their academic achievement and made learning more

enjoyable.

       The above studies (e.g., Disseldorp & Chambers, 2002; Elkind, 1998; Leong,

1995; wise & Olson, 1994) demonstrated the effectiveness of TTS tools in meeting

specific objectives related to literacy and content area learning for students with

disabilities. Not all data show such gains, however. For example, Elbro et al. (1996)

found that TTS did not result in progress in phonics and phonemic awareness. Farmer et

al. (1992) used TTS to read segmented syllables and provide feedback on the accuracy of

letter names. The results showed that TTS limited students’ performance on word

recognition and reading comprehension.

       In addition, Lundberg and Oloffson (1993) did not find performance differences

in word decoding for students with LD under the conditions of reading online with and

without the support of Read & Write Gold. In the study, students had access to the
                                           Text to Speech Tools                             12


features of (a) double highlighting, (b) adjustment of highlighting color and font, and (c)

animated or nonanimated speech balloons.

       Borgh and Dickson (1992) reported the outcomes of using a word processor with

TTS features on writing performance of 2nd and 5th graders. They concluded that read-

aloud feature increased the 2nd graders’ editing levels, but not the 5th graders’. The read-

aloud did improve the length of the stories the 2nd and 5th graders wrote, either.

       Based on the previous investigations, several conclusions can be drawn on the use

of TTS tools. First, TTS has the potential to benefit students’ achievement in content

areas. However, prior studies mainly focused on examining the effects of the two TTS

features—read-aloud and highlighting--on reading and writing. As Wise, Ring, and Olson

(2000) contend, read-aloud and highlighting offered students audio and visual stimuli that

were beneficial for enhancing students’ reading and writing skills. More research is

needed to identify the influences of other features and their effects on other subject

matters, such as math, science etc..

       Second, many studies have concluded that TTS tools resulted in more desired

improvement for poor readers than good ones (e.g., Disseldorp & Chambers, 2002;

Elkind, 1998; Leong, 1995). However, it is unknown whether the types of TTS tools

(toolbar application vs. free standing software; free vs. expensive version) affect their

effects. Future study may, therefore, investigate the impact of different categories of TTS

for both struggling and regular students. The findings will contribute to appropriate TTS

selection and to better meet the individual needs of each student.

       Third, researchers have concluded grade level (Lundberg & Oloffson, 1993)

was one factor influencing the effectiveness of TTS programs. For example,
                                           Text to Speech Tools                             13


Lundberg and Oloffson (1993) found that TTS improved the reading comprehension

of 4th, 6th and 7th graders, not 2nd and 3rd graders. Farmer et al. (1992) claimed that

TTS played negative roles in the reading comprehension of high school students.

However, an unanswered question is whether TTS works most effectively with

students at certain grade levels. This is a promising area that needs to be

investigated.

                          Implications for Classroom Use of TTS

       TTS tools provide teachers with the options for transforming inaccessible print

into accessible formats and consequently, increasing learning opportunities for all

students, including those with special needs (Pisha & Coyne, 2001). TTS tools also offer

teachers more instructional flexibility because they can choose to use specific features of

TTS tools to meet the individual needs of their students. However, some factors

influencing the effects of TTS need to be addressed in order to effectively apply TTS

tools to maximize students’ academic achievement at school.

       First, given that some TTS features are complicated, students need guidance and

training to effectively operate these programs and acquire desired results to boost their

school success (Hecker et al., 2002). Teachers must ensure their availability to provide

assistance to their students during the process of learning and using the TTS tools.

       Second, teacher professional development is an important element affecting the

outcomes of TTS. Teacher training and professional development are crucial for ensuring

they can not only proficiently apply TTS programs in their class but also direct their

students to successfully use the tools.
                                           Text to Speech Tools                             14


       Third, teacher time and workload need to be taken into account when using TTS.

If teachers are to use sophisticated TTS tools to create fully-supported texts (e.g.,

Anderson-Inman & Horney, 2007), scanning print texts into electronic versions and then

enhancing them with resources is time-consuming and can be an extra burden to the

teacher (Howard, 2004). Online navigation is another time-consuming activity; teachers

need to assess the appropriateness of the website resources for their students. In addition,

copyright issues limit the transformation of print-based materials, such as student

textbooks, into electronic versions , and it is unrealistic to think that most individual

teachers will have the time and/or knowledge to pursue copyright agreements. These

types of activities are best handled at some higher organizational level, such as a district

curriculum center or state educational agency.

       Finally, educators must keep in mind that mere use of TTS is not a substitute for

good instruction. Students still require effective instruction in word recognition,

comprehension, vocabulary, and cognitive strategies in order to make effective use of

texts, whether of pleasure or content-area learning.
                                         Text to Speech Tools                               15


                                       References

Auld, P. & Spagnolo, M. (May, 2007). Text-to-Speech Project: A Multi-Jurisdictional

       Research Project. Advancing Accessibility Through Technology Institute. Putting

       The Pieces Together, Educational Technology Council, Edmonton, Alberta.

Balajthy, E. (2005). Text-to-Speech software for helping struggling readers. Retrieved

       April 3rd, 2007, from

       http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=balajthy2/index.html

Borgh, K., & Dickson, W. P. (1992). The effects on children are writing of adding speech

       synthesis to a word processor. Journal of Research in Computing in Education,

       24(4), 533-544.

Cantu, D. & Warren, W.J. (2003). Teaching History in the Digital Classroom. Armonk,

       NY & London, UK: M.E. Sharpe.

Daal, V. H. P., & Leij, A. V.D. (1992). Computer-based reading and spelling practice for

       children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(3), 186-

       195.

Davidson, J., Coles, D., Noyes, P., & Terrell, C. (1991). Using computer-delivered

       natural speech to assist in the teaching of reading. British Journal of Educational

       Technology, 22(2), 110-118.

Dawson, L., Venn, M., & Gunter, P. L. (2000). The effects of teacher versus computer

       reading models. Behavioral Disorders, 25(2), 105-113.

Disseldorp, B. & Chambers, D.P. (2002). Independent access: Which students might

       benefit from a talking computer? Proceedings of the Australian Society for

       Educational Technology Conference, Melbourne
                                          Text to Speech Tools                           16


Elbro, C., Rasmussen, I., & Spelling, B. (1996). Teaching reading to disabled readers

       with language disorders: a controlled evaluation of synthetic speech feedback.

       Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 37, 140-155.

Elkind, J. (January, 1998). Computer reading machines for poor readers. Portola Valley,

       CA: Lexia Institute

Farmer, M. E., Klein, R., & Bryson, S. E. (1992). Computer-assisted reading: Effects of

       whole-word feedback on fluency and comprehension in readers with severe

       disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 13(2), 50-60.

Hecker, L., Burns, L., & Elkind, J. (2002). Benefits of assistive reading software for

       students with attention disorders. Annals of Dyslexia, 52, 244-272.

Hebert, B. M., & Murdock, J. Y. (1994). Comparing three computer-aided instruction

       output modes to teach vocabulary words to students with learning disabilities.

       Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9(3), 136-141.

Hewlett, M. G. & Burnett, A. N. ( n. d.), Text-to-Speech software and webCT: Issues of

       compatibility. Retrieved September 18, 2006, from

       http://web.unbc.ca/wccce05/Text-to-Speech_Software.doc

Higgins, E.L., & Raskind, M. H. (1995). The compensatory effectiveness of the

       quicktionary reading pen II on the reading comprehension of students with

       Learning Disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20 (1), 29-38.

Howard, K.L. (2004). Universal design for learning: Meeting the needs of all students.

       Learning & Leading With Technology, 31, 26-29.

James, A. (2006). Making your computer speak using text to speech. Retrieved January

       20, 2007, from http://www.dyslexic.com/textcomp
                                         Text to Speech Tools                           17


Kurzweil Educational Systems. (2006). Retrieved October 14, 2006, from

       http://www.kurzweiledu.com/

Lewandowski, J., & Montali, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer

       for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271–

       279.

Leong, C. K. (1992). Enhancing reading comprehension with text-to-speech

       (DECtalk) computer system. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary

       Journal, 4, 205-217.

Leong, C.K. (1995). Effects of on-line reading and simultaneous DECtalk auding in

       helping below-average and poor readers comprehend and summarize text. Learning

       Disability Quarterly, 18, 101-116.

Lundberg, I., & Olofsson, A. (1993). Can computer speech support reading

       comprehension? Computers in Human Behavior, 9, 283-293.

McKenna, M. C. (1998). In D. Reinking, M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, & R. D. Kieffer

       (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology (pp. 45-59). Mahwah, New Jersey:

       Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Pp. 50-57

Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: benefits of a talking computer

       for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271-

       279.

Olson, R.K. & Wise, B.W. (1992). Reading on the computer with orthographic and

       speech feedback: An overview of the Colorado Remedial Reading Project.

       Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 107-144
                                         Text to Speech Tools                             18


Painter, D. D. (2001). What happens when students use text-to-speech and word predict

       programs to compose text? Retrieved November 16, 2006, from

       http://gse.gmu.edu/research/tr/articles/predict.html

Pisha, B., & Coyne, P. (2001). Jumping off the page: Content area curriculum for the

       Internet age. Reading Online, 4. Retrieved December 2004, from

       www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=pisha/

Reitsma, P. (1988). Reading practice for beginners: Effects of guided reading, reading-

       while-listening, and independent reading with computer-based speech feedback.

       Reading Research Quarterly, 13(2), 219-235

Shany, M. T., & Biemiller, A. (1995). Assisted reading practice: effects on performance

       for poor readers in grades 3 and 4. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(3), 382-395.

Tian, J., & Okolo, C. M. (2007). Text-To-Speech Feature Analysis and Comparison.

       East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

The WestEd RTEC. (2004), Retrieved May 15, 2007, from

       http://rtecexchange.edgateway.net/cs/rtecp/view/rtec_sub/88

Universal Low Vision Aids, (2007). WYNN. Retrieved March 1, 2007 from

       http://www.ulva.com/Online-Store/Literacy-Education-Typing/wynn.htm

Wise, B. W. (1992). Whole words and decoding for short-term learning: comparisons on

       a "talking-computer" system. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54, 147-

       167.

Wise, B.W., & Olson, R.K. (1994). Computer speech and the remediation of reading and

       spelling problems. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 207-220.
                                        Text to Speech Tools                           19


Wise, B.W., Ring, J., & Olson, R.K. (2000). Individual differences in gains from

       computer-assisted remedial reading with more emphasis on phonological analysis

       or accurate reading in context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77,

       197-235.