European Journal of Special Needs Education

ISSN: 0885-6257 (Print) 1469-591X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rejs20

Foreign language learning for children with ADHD:

evidence from a technology-enhanced learning
environment

Trisevgeni Liontou

To cite this article: Trisevgeni Liontou (2019): Foreign language learning for children with ADHD:
evidence from a technology-enhanced learning environment, European Journal of Special Needs
Education, DOI: 10.1080/08856257.2019.1581403

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581403

Published online: 26 Feb 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 21

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rejs20
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581403

ARTICLE

Foreign language learning for children with ADHD: evidence

from a technology-enhanced learning environment
Trisevgeni Liontou
Department of English Language & Literature, National & Kapodistrian, University of Athens, Athens, Greece

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The need to give equal access to education and make the learning Received 15 February 2018
process fruitful for every student, regardless of his/her individual Accepted 8 May 2018
abilities, has resulted in an increased focus of attention by modern KEYWORDS
educators who have explored the impact of different teaching prac- Learning differences;
tices on students with Learning Differences (LDs). However, there is reading comprehension
still lack of empirical evidence as regards the most efficient English as processes; technology-
a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching methodology and pertinent enhanced learning; young
material for students with such differences. This paper reports on Attention Deficit
a one-year study that aimed at investigating the development of Hyperactivity Disorder
young Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) learners’ read- (ADHD) learners
ing competence within a Technology-Enhanced Learning
Environment (TELE). A total of ten EFL students aged 9 to 12 years
old participated in the research, all of which were officially diagnosed
with ADHD syndrome. The study concludes by presenting explicit
teaching and testing accommodations that could be adopted from
primary to tertiary one. As such, the included suggestions aspire to
yield practical guidance and insight to EFL instructors, material devel-
opers and curricula designers from primary to tertiary education in
reference to specific computer-based features embedded in reading
comprehension activities that might prove helpful to ADHD learners
throughout their lives.

Introduction
The need to give equal access to education and make the learning process fruitful for every
student, regardless of his/her individual abilities, has recently resulted in an increased focus of
attention by modern educators who have explored the impact of different teaching practices
on students with Learning Differences (LDs). Common treatments include adjusting the
environment to accommodate the disorder, behaviours modification, and the use of medica-
tions along with psychological and psychiatric support to address severe conditions
(American Psychiatric Association 2013; Jensen 2008; Foreman 2006). It is worth highlighting
at this point that, although the appearance of such disorders is not attributed to sight and/or
auditory problems, social and economic conditions, limited motivation or inefficient teaching
methods, they do, nevertheless, have a negative learning impact on students who would
otherwise exhibit at least average abilities for developing their thinking and reasoning skills
(National Institute of Mental Health 2016; Bailey 2011; Mortimore 2008). Thus, learning

CONTACT Trisevgeni Liontou [email protected]

© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 T. LIONTOU

differences are distinct from global intellectual deficiency ones as there often appears to be
a lack of congruence between a student’s observed abilities and final accomplishment
(Flick 2010; Archambault and Crippen 2009). To account for such a discrepancy, learning
differences are referred to as hidden disabilities since a rather intelligent student may prove
incapable of demonstrating a range of skills expected from someone of his/her age (Barkley
2014; Sroubek, Kelly, and Li 2013; Schonwald and Lechner 2006).
Despite such a noted discrepancy, limited research is available regarding the most
beneficial teaching practices and materials for students with specific learning differences
(SpLDs) in an EFL context. Given the fact that the ability to read and write is not only
necessary for successful performance in a school setting but can also have an effect on the
individual’s possible inclusion in and/or exclusion from the literate society (Kucer 2001;
Tsagari and Sperling 2017), specific learning differences among children have been asso-
ciated with poor literacy development in Foreign Language (FL) learning which remains
a thorny problem for educators when teaching and, especially, when designing assessment
material for SpLD students (Swanson, Harris, and Graham 2004; Tannock 2005). Within this
framework, the current paper reports on a one-year classroom-based study that aimed at
investigating the development of young Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
learners’ reading skills within a Technology-Enhanced Learning Environment (TELE). To this
end, computer-based reading comprehension activities are presented while discussing their
possible effect on reinforcing young learners reading comprehension skills despite their
experiencing difficulties when learning EFL due to their attention deficit and hyperactivity
disorder problems. The study concludes by making specific suggestions for classroom-
based teaching and assessment practices in all levels of education, from primary schools
to universities. As such, the findings of the study could provide practical guidance to EFL
instructors, material developers and test designers from primary to tertiary education with
regard to the type of reading comprehension computer-based activities that seem to be of
great benefit to ADHD learners while learning or being assessed in their EFL knowledge
throughout their life.

Foreign language learning for children with ADHD

In medical terms, ADHD has been defined as a neurodevelopmental disorder character-
ized by an ongoing pattern of inattention while accompanied by an extremely high level
of hyperactivity and/or impulsivity (Sroubek, Kelly, and Li 2013; National Institute of
Mental Health 2016). A child with ADHD may be extremely distractible, unable to remain
still and concentrate for a long time on a specific task, impulsive, restless and very
talkative (Clauss-Ehlers 2010; Burt et al. 2001; Barkley 1997; Bender 1997). Although not
all ADHD children exhibit the same degree of hyperactivity and restlessness, most of
them do find it difficult to focus on a specific task, make careless mistakes, struggle to
follow instructions and complete tasks on time, keep fidgeting and squirming in their
seat and give the impression of daydreaming and “tuning out’ when not interested in
the lesson (Taylor 2017; Burt et al. 2001; Lock, Worley, and Worlaich 2008). Moreover, an
ADHD student is usually an impatient, impulsive and unpredictable person with poor
organisational skills, who often fails to control his/her own behaviour, resorts to verbal
outbursts when frustrated and shows no apparent regard for the consequences of his/
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 3

her actions (Thapar et al. 2013; Lavoie 2007). While ADHD learners often receive
psychological support and medication, it is strongly believed that without their teachers’
understanding and continuous encouragement, they run a risk of falling behind acade-
mically (Flick 2010; Difino and Lombardino 2004; DuPaul and Stoner 2002). According to
recent studies about 5–10% of school-aged children around the world experience
learning and social functioning difficulties due to their ADHD syndrome (Coghill et al.
2017; Flick 2010; Polanczyk et al. 2007) Such a finding lends support to the view that,
within the standard classroom, a considerable number of students will be in need of
their teachers’ special support, highlighting the importance of paying special attention
to this issue (Coghill et al. 2017; Flick 2010; Turketi 2010).
As highlighted by Klinger, Vaughn, and Boardman (2007) FL usually poses an addi-
tional burden for students with ADHD since a high percentage of them also face speech
processing difficulties caused by their central nervous system dysfunction. Some studies
trace the root of the ADHD problem in the underdevelopment of the front lobe of the
brain (Forness and Kavale 2001), while other researchers claim that the language abilities
of ADHD students are primarily influenced by their working memory deficiency (Thapar
et al. 2013, 2012; Witton et al. 1998). Regardless of the underlying factors, in most cases,
both speech reception and production are affected, resulting in making the process of
learning a language rather challenging and even bewildering for these students (Turketi
2010). Considering the fact that many of the latter already face difficulties when reading,
writing, listening and speaking in their mother tongue, such strains are usually carried
over and can negatively influence their FL endeavour (Nijakowska 2010; Spear-Swerling
and Owen-Brucker 2006; Sparks et al. 1992).
With specific reference to reading comprehension processes in the EFL context,
a student with ADHD syndrome may frequently skip letters, words or whole sentences
and misunderstand or even fail to capture the main propositions of a given text, especially
when exposed to longer texts (Turketi 2010; Williams 2000; Gersten et al. 1998). As Turketi
(2010) explains, the English language in particular could present a great challenge for
those learners given the lack of a straightforward letter-sound correspondence along with
the presence of numerous exceptions in reading rules. Such an inherent language
difficulty of differentiating characters and sounds can present an additional challenge
on top of their ever-present lack of concentration, especially when there is no similarity
with their mother tongue for beneficial transfer of pre-existing schemata to occur. For
Turketi (2010) the development of reading skills in English can be an even more demand-
ing task for those ADHD students whose mother tongue does not contain a great variety
of reading rules and exceptions and might need a paradigm shift in the students’ mind
when exposed to a foreign language (Krashen 1981). This argument is concomitant with
research findings showing that, when asked to read aloud in English, the ADHD learners
experience puzzlement and disappointment to a greater extent than their classmates and
their actual reading performance consistently falls far below the one anticipated by their
educators (Jensen et al. 1993; Turketi 2010). Nevertheless, as Turketi (2010) suggests, if the
input is enhanced and presented in an interesting way using different modes of instruc-
tion (oral, visual, etc.), an ADHD student has increased possibilities to attain the main
learning objectives of the syllabus.
Moreover, ADHD students might find it difficult to decode the meaning of multivocal
words and metaphorical language while they usually read at a slow pace, since they
4 T. LIONTOU

need more time to process written language due to their poor decoding skills (Klinger,
Vaughn, and Boardman 2007; Hallowell 1994). In addition, ADHD students are reluctant
to read aloud, particularly when not feeling confident enough to successfully process
the text at hand in front of their classmates (Jensen et al. 1993; Chan and Cole 1986). As
Brooks (2002) explains the inclination on the part of an ADHD student to refrain from
carrying out an assigned task is mainly due to the fact that she/he does not want to fail
since ‘. . .a major feature of the mind set of many individuals with ADHD is their belief
that they are not very competent, that they are destined to fail, and they do not control
their own destiny.’ (136). According to Brooks (2002), leaving ADHD people to their
wishes in such a situation only provides them with an ephemeral sense of salvation
hastily replaced with personal disappointment which makes them feel even more
insecure and vulnerable in the long run.
To sum up, although it is generally acknowledged that most ADHD children do not
require special educational services per se and therefore can attend mainstream schools,
nearly all of them are likely to benefit from informed adjustments and accommodations
regarding the organization and monitoring of their learning process throughout their
school years (National Institute of Mental Health 2016; National Collaborating Centre for
Mental Health 2009; Swanson and Hoskyn 1998; Robelia 1997). Having said that, the
need for educators who have both the expertise and aptitude to teach students with
behavioral disturbance disorders is believed to be more critical today than ever before.
In a similar vein, EFL teachers must be sufficiently trained to provide a high-quality
education based on each student’s needs, since lack of such teaching expertise can not
only have a negative impact on ADHD students’ academic progress but also give rise to
a rather tense and stressful atmosphere in a general-education classroom (Turketi 2010;
Silver 2004; Schiller 1996; DuPaul and Stoner 1994).

Methodology
As Stockman (2009) points out ‘the acquisition of complex human skills, language
included, is undoubtedly, a multisensory task, involving collaboration of all the senses’
(12). Concomitant with such an argument is the belief that the more associations and
attention stimuli ADHD students are provided with, the higher the possibility to benefit
from a taught lesson (DuPaul and Stoner 2002; Scruggs and Mastropieri 2000; Turketi
2010). To increase the extent of enhanced input, a range of sources could be employed
for activities that incorporate different learning styles to be created (Scruggs and
Mastropieri 2000; Robelia 1997). Bearing in mind these suggestions, a Technology-
Enhanced Learning Environment (TELE), i.e. an environment in which Information and
Communications Technology (ICT) applications are used to support and facilitate learn-
ing while technology is a means to accomplish specific learning objectives while helping
teachers design appropriate learning materials and students carry out meaningful tasks,
could have an important role to play in the FL learning process of ADHD students.
Although it is beyond the scope of the present paper to provide a review of available
research on technology-enhanced learning practices, it is worth mentioning that, due to
its reported positive effect on language learning in general, the use of technology as
a language acquisition medium has increased in the last two decades (Greenfield 2003).
As McIntyre, Mirriahi, and Watson (2014) and Parker, Maor, and Herrington (2013) argue
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 5

computer-assisted language learning can help learners use language in authentic situa-
tions while promoting their social skills.
The abundance of studies on using technology to support language learning has been
accompanied by a regrettable lack of comparable research into the investigation of such
practices with ADHD students. To fill this void, the present study, which is based on a previous
study by Liontou (2015) addressing students with no learning differences, aimed at investigat-
ing the development of young ADHD learners’ reading competence within a TELE. To address
the aims of the study, the following research questions were formed:

(1) What is the general attitude of young ADHD learners towards the use of TELE in
their EFL lessons?
(2) What is the specific attitude of young ADHD learners towards the use of TELE to
strengthen their EFL reading comprehension skills?
(3) Can specific computer-embedded features facilitate text processing for young
ADHD learners?

In the present study the same methodology applied in Liontou (2015) was replicated
with modifications to meet the special needs of current participants. A total of 10 EFL
students aged 9 to 12 years old took part in the study, all of which had been officially
diagnosed with ADHD syndrome. The main aim of the study was to create a more dynamic
learning environment aligned with the rest of the curriculum in order to increase such
young EFL learners’ engagement and motivation while reducing their lack of concentration
and distraction barriers. The study lasted one year and consisted of two face-to-face lessons
per week plus computer-based activities in the school computer laboratory. Participants’
language proficiency (beginner level-A2) was diagnosed through a calibrated English
language test (Cambridge Key English Test-KET). All participants had been taught ICT as
a compulsory school subject for two years before taking part in the study. As a part of their IT
courses, students had been exposed to various word-processing and desktop publishing
software applications and were familiar with simple online environments. The online class
components consisted of a free on-line Edmodo classroom with handouts, extra activities,
text resources and discussion groups for students to further develop their digital literacy
along with their English language knowledge. The Edmodo is a free e-learning software
package, designed to help teachers quickly set up their online classes. Following parents’
written consent, the students taking part in the present study were able to complete a range
of language-related tasks as registered users with controlled access. The tasks included
revising information presented in the classroom (hand-outs and video lectures), carrying out
computer-based quizzes with gap-filling, multiple-choice, true-false, drag-and-drop activ-
ities, accessing online resources such as e-books and electronic dictionaries, as well as
posting their wikis on a variety of topics. Their individual contributions to each specific
wiki formed part of their overall assessment so ADHD students were more than willing to
post comments and share their thoughts with their classmates.
In order to gather valuable information on ADHD learners’ perceptions of online
teaching practices, a five-point Likert scale paper-and-pencil attitude questionnaire was
administered to them upon completion of the school year. To facilitate respondents’
understanding and ease their answers, the questionnaire (see Appendix 1) was written
in respondents’ native language, Greek. This minimized reliability and validity problems
6 T. LIONTOU

caused by the language factor. Participants were requested to rate their agreement or
disagreement with 20 statements using a five-point scale. Statements were related to
their attitudes to online teaching practices, feelings of preference, enjoyment and
motivation when taking part in online activities, as well as perceived difficulties encoun-
tered while doing computer-based activities. The TELE attitude questionnaire
(see Appendix 1) used in the present study was an adapted version of the one used
by Bulut and AbuSeileek (2006) and Liontou (2015).

Computer-based EFL activities for ADHD learners

Given space limitations, it falls beyond the scope of the present paper to provide
a comprehensive account of the full range of computer-based activities ADHD students
were exposed to throughout the school year. Nevertheless, representative activities will
be presented while elaborating on specific technology-enhanced features that seemed
to have had a beneficial impact on ADHD learners’ reading comprehension attitudes and
performance.
To begin with, activities were designed bearing in mind ADHD students’ specific
learning difficulties along with their learning styles. Since ADHD students are visual
learners (Greathead 2010), the reading texts were accompanied by relevant visual prompts
to help the former process information through visualization, while fonts in bright colours
and different sizes were used to catch their attention (Renz et al. 2003). In order to
alleviate their fear of making mistakes short funny videos on how to answer different
types of reading comprehension questions were included before each activity along with
a motto phrase that exculpated mistakes and presented them as an indispensable part of
the learning process. Given ADHD students’ inherent difficulty in processing long, propo-
sitionally dense texts, each screenshot included only a short part of the text on the left
side of the screen along with a filled-in mind-map on the right side for basic information
to be organized in a visually accessible manner (Greathead 2010; Klinger, Vaughn, and
Boardman 2007). Such a screen display could prevent them from missing the key points
and main ideas, especially when exposed to longer texts.
Furthermore, in order to help them monitor their time and complete tasks on time,
a countdown clock was included on each screen display. In addition, clicking on the Submit
Answer button did not automatically lead them to the subsequent question but would
rather give rise to a warning message that cross-checking selected answers for a specific
amount of time was needed in order to proceed (a way to reduce careless mistakes). An
additional feature that seems to have been emotionally supportive to ADHD students is the
possibility on-line activities offer them to change and resubmit their answers without being
penalized for their mistakes, an option particularly useful for self-study purposes.
Bearing in mind that ADHD students often tend to refuse to read aloud when being
called on by their EFL teacher (Goldstein and Ellison 2002; Jensen et al. 1993),
a microphone button was included next to the reading texts for students to record
themselves reading the text whenever convenient to them, without being afraid of
humiliating themselves in front of their classmates (Mikami 2010). Students could record
themselves as many times as they wished to and save the audio file they thought to
represent their most successful attempt. Most importantly, feedback included in com-
puter-based activities was more detailed and supportive compared to the terrifying
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 7

traditional red-pen teacher’s comments on a student’s worksheet. To be more specific,

when answering multiple-choice questions in an online quiz, students received immedi-
ate feedback in the form of speech bubbles praising correct answers and elaborating on
incorrect ones instead of being presented with a specific score.
Another beneficial quality of computer-based EFL activities relates to the fact that
new lexical items and grammar structures per lesson could be easily revised through
supplementary material in subsequent on-line lessons through different task types
(Macaruso and Rodman 2011; Chujyo and Nishigaki 2005), without ADHD students
feeling overwhelmed by the amount of extra work they had to do in order to cope
with classroom requirements.

ADHD learners’ attitude towards online EFL activities

Table 1 shows the results from ADHD learners’ general perceptions towards computer-
based activities (Questions 1–15). Data analysis revealed that the majority of responses
ranged on the average from fairly to very satisfactory.
In addition, the majority of students agreed (30%) or strongly agreed (40%) with
Statement 1: I can access extra information more easily during an online class) and
expressed a clear preference (Agree to Strongly Agree: 90%) for online classes to traditional
ones (Statement 15: I prefer online to traditional face-to-face lessons for EFL classes). This
finding might suggest that the wider the range of online activities, the more interesting and
motivating language learning could have become for young ADHD learners along with less
stressful one (Statement 3: An online class is a stress-free environment to learn English
Agree: 40%-Strongly Agree: 60%). This strengthens the view that not only the range but also
students’ prior familiarity with specific online applications could have increased their levels
of self-confidence and motivation when expected to use them in an educational context. On
the average, participants also reported feelings of increased self-confidence (Statement 12:
I have become a better problem-solver after using the computer while learning English
(Agree: 40% & Strongly Agree: 20%) along with Statement 13: The online EFL course has
helped me become an independent learner (Agree: 90%).

Table 1. ADHD learners’ general attitude towards computer-based activities.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Not sure Agree Strongly Agree
Statements Freq. % Freq. % Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
1 0 0 1 10 2 20 3 30 4 40
2 0 0 1 10 1 10 3 30 5 50
3 8 80 2 20 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 40 6 60
5 0 0 0 0 1 10 5 50 4 40
6 0 0 0 0 3 30 4 40 3 30
7 0 0 1 10 0 0 6 60 3 30
8 0 0 1 10 2 20 2 20 5 50
9 1 10 2 20 2 20 5 50 0 0
10 2 20 2 20 4 40 1 10 1 10
11 0 0 0 0 2 20 2 20 6 60
12 1 10 3 30 0 0 4 40 2 20
13 0 0 1 10 0 0 9 90 0 0
14 0 0 2 20 2 20 2 20 4 40
15 0 0 0 0 1 10 3 30 6 60
8 T. LIONTOU

In order to identify ADHD learners’ attitudes towards the use of computer-based activities
for the development of their reading comprehension skill, five related questions (Statements
16–20) were included in the questionnaire. As shown in Table 2 below, the highest frequency
score was 80% (Agree/Strongly Agree) for Item 16: It is easy to access the meaning of words
(e.g., use online dictionaries, pictures) to help me understand what I read in my online EFL
classes, Item 18: I prefer to practice EFL reading comprehension via computers and Item 19:
Reading via computers is more interesting when supported with visual information. These
findings can be partly attributed to the fact that, since computer-based reading comprehen-
sion texts included annotated texts and electronic dictionary use, ADHD students had the
opportunity to overcome any vocabulary difficulties while processing their online texts or
answering reading questions. The fact that visual information ranked high in their preference
further strengthens the view that visual stimuli could be supportive throughout the reading
comprehension process of such students. On the other hand, the lowest frequency score was
observed for Item 17: In EFL reading courses, listening to the written text helps me compre-
hend it better. This can be partly explained by the fact that when a text was difficult for ADHD
readers to comprehend, listening to it could not help them overcome lexicogrammatical
barriers but rather added a burden to their already weak span for auditory-verbal information.
Given the limited number of participants, no generalizations can be made based on
analysed questionnaire data but it is worth highlighting that the predominant tone
emerging from students’ reports and reactions throughout the school year was one of
accomplishment and personal satisfaction with learners describing an educational jour-
ney that moved from hesitancy and confusion to increased self-esteem and pleasure
with the outcome of their endeavours. To be more specific, data analysis indicated that,
in spite their inherent learning disorder, ADHD students can succeed in learning
a foreign language, so long as the employed teaching practices address their needs in
the most adequate way (Silver 2004; Robelia 1997; Schiller 1996). At the same time, it is
strongly believed that such activities could also make the FL learning process more
beneficial for their classmates who do not have ADHD, thus creating an enjoyable
learning experience for all students. Echoing Turketi (2010), the present study further
supports the view that both teaching English to ADHD children and assessing their
foreign language competence do not ask for the development of a separate teaching
method, since the existing EFL methodology offers a wide variety of tools that can be
successfully applied, to students with these learning differences (Snae and Brueckner
2008; Krashen 1981; Richards and Rodgers 2001). Nevertheless, for any intervention to
be pay dividends, a pedagogically informed choice of the specific teaching approaches
that can address ADHD learners’ need in the most efficient and effective way. Examples
of such accommodations could include creating task sheets with fewer questions per

Table 2. ADHD learners’ attitude towards computer-based reading activities.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Not sure Agree Strongly Agree
Statements Freq. % Freq. % Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
16 0 0 1 10 1 10 6 60 2 20
17 3 30 2 20 2 20 2 20 1 10
18 0 0 0 0 2 20 6 60 2 20
19 0 0 1 10 1 10 3 30 5 50
20 0 0 1 10 1 10 6 60 2 20
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 9

activity, giving frequent short quizzes rather than long tests, dividing long-term projects
into segments and assigning a completion goal for each segment, starting the lesson by
explaining the learning objectives and the exact materials to be used, keeping instruc-
tions simple and structured along with using charts and other visual aids to present
information in a well-organized manner (Lavoie 2007; Robelia 1997). Nevertheless,
personal experience has shown that the most effective tool in helping a student with
ADHD throughout his/her learning process is a positive attitude to his/her efforts
through immediate and sincere praise.
Review of pertinent literature illustrates that the use of ICT can assist foreign lan-
guage learners strengthen their reading, writing, listening and speaking skills while
developing their reasoning and social skills through their participation in online discus-
sion forums (Archambault and Crippen 2009; Herrington and Parker 2013; McIntyre,
Mirriahi, and Watson 2014; Parker, Maor, and Herrington 2013; Yang 2009). The findings
of the present small-scale research conform to the view that learners appear to hold
a positive stance towards using ICT applications throughout the learning process.
According to Ayres (2002, 247) ‘learners appreciate and value the learning that they
do using the computers’; similarly, Bulut and AbuSeileek (2006) reported highly positive
attitudes towards online English language learning. To recapitulate, following
Almahboub’s (2000) argument that learners should draw pleasure from any learning
environment in order to develop a positive attitude towards the learning process as
a whol, the findings of the present study support the view that, especially as regards
ADHD learners, a technology-enhanced environment could not only facilitate their
learning process but also help increase their levels of motivation and self-confidence.

Conclusion
The aim of the present study was to support and enhance young ADHD learners’
reading abilities while feeding into the creation of advantageous TELE teaching and
assessment practices for EFL students with SpLDs. To this end, computer-based reading
comprehension activities were designed in accord with students’ specific learning styles
while their potential for supporting the development of reading comprehension skills to
young ADHD learners was explored.
The findings of the present study lend further credence to the view that success for
students with learning differences makes imperative the adoption of differentiated
teaching methods to meet the diverse educational needs of ADHD learners
(Difino and Lombardino 2004). According to Nijakowska (2010) and Spear-Swerling
and Owen-Brucker (2006), English language learners with SpLDs can benefit from
adjustments that have been found to assist monolingual learners with learning disabil-
ities such as explicit phonemic awareness instruction along with explicit instruction in
reading comprehension strategies and peer-assisted learning. More recently, Johnson
and Viljoen (2017) suggest a number of practices that could be followed in order to
facilitate learning among young learners with SpLDs such as focusing on their strengths
instead of their weaknesses, setting reasonable expectations and providing the guidance
needed for independence. Furthermore, they support that maintaining consistent dis-
cipline and fostering intellectual curiosity could be rather beneficial for young children
with SpLDs. In addition, they underline the need to provide good language models
10 T. LIONTOU

while developing well-structured and motivating activities for children with attention
problems. Taking everything into consideration, it is important to acknowledge the great
heterogeneity the population of children with SpLDs presents. Therefore, suggestions
made by various researchers are not always applicable to all ADHD learners, but they
rather set the general framework that needs to be adjusted to individual needs and
learning styles.
As with all studies, the implementation of the present one included a number of
challenges and limitations that it is hoped will be overcome in future research. To begin
with, given the limited number of participants restrictions apply to the generalization of
the findings. In the case of a larger sample, the validity and reliability of the study would
have been enhanced. Regarding the students’ attitude questionnaire, while it has
provided useful insights into learners’ perceptions of computer-based activities, we
must be wary of the limitations of young student-opinion data as, at best, these data
indicated perceived attitudes in foreign language acquisition process. Moreover, other
attitudes that were not included in the questionnaire might have been present, or even
that the reported ones might have been experienced more or less often than partici-
pants indicated.
The present study aspired to demonstrate some benefits of using educational tech-
nologies in the EFL classroom among young learners with SpLDs in an attempt to
support and further develop their reading abilities. However, the limitations presented
above raise a number of suggestions for further investigation in the area. Firstly, it might
prove beneficial if the current study were conducted with a larger number of partici-
pants and extended over a longer period of time for learners to fully acquaint them-
selves with TELE and take advantage of its educational benefits. Furthermore, it would
be interesting to investigate how TELE in general could benefit young learners with LDs
if used on a daily basis within their standard school setting.
As the population of students in mainstream education is becoming increasingly
diverse, the percentage of children diagnosed with a SpLD is constantly increasing
along with the number of students enrolled in special education classes (Tsagari and
Sperling 2017). Such a tendency, amalgamated with increased public awareness of human
rights, has led to a higher demand for appropriate teaching and assessment schemes
(Tsagari and Sperling, 2017). The findings of the proposed research can provide useful
practical guidance to EFL instructors, material developers and curricula designers across all
educational levels as regards computer-based interventions and accommodations that
could prove beneficial to students with learning differences while learning EFL throughout
their lives. Furthermore, findings from the present study could supplement existing
knowledge and even serve as a springboard towards the development of a taxonomy
scheme that could be used to classify the different stages of foreign language acquisition
and even streamline the process of identifying SpLD children within the standard class-
room setting. Finally, the present research could act as an impetus towards more in-depth
investigation into the difficulties an ADHD student encounters when striving to process
a written text in English as a foreign language. If equal access to education continues to
be a fundamental characteristic of our supposedly civilized societies, it becomes indis-
putable for educators to cater for their students’ special learning needs and be supportive
of diversity to the best of their ability.
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 11

Disclaimer
The methodology followed and questionnaire administered to participants in the present study
consist a replication of research carried out with non-ADHD learners by Liontou (2015). Liontou
(2015. ‘Intermediate Greek EF Learners’ Attitudes to On-Line Teaching Practices: A Blended Task-
Based English Language Learning Approach.’ Teaching English with Technology 15 (2): 81-93.
An abridged, preliminary version of the manuscript was presented at the 12th International
Technology, Education and Development Conference. Available: https://library.iated.org/

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor
Trisevgeni Liontou is Associate Lecturer at the Department of Language & Linguistics, Faculty of
English Language and Literature of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece.
She holds a Ph.D. in English Language & Linguistics with specialization in EFL Testing &
Assessment from the same faculty. She holds a B.A. in English Language & Literature and another
B.A. in Spanish Language & Literature. She also holds an M.A. in Lexicography: Theory and
Applications and another M.A. in Information Technology in Education from Reading University,
UK. Along with her new position, she is working as an Adjunct Instructor at the Hellenic Open
University. She has worked as a research assistant, expert item consultant, freelance item writer,
oral examiner and script rater for various national and international EFL examination boards. She
has made presentations in national and international conferences and has published papers in the
aforementioned fields. Her current research interests include theoretical and practical issues of EFL
pedagogy, testing and assessing foreign language competence with specific reference to learners
with LDs, reading comprehension performance, computational linguistics and classroom-based
assessment.

References
Almahboub, S. F. 2000. “Attitudes toward Computer Use and Gender Differences among Kuwaiti
Sixth-Grade Students.” PhD diss., University of North Texas.
American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th
ed. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing Press.
Archambault, L., and K. Crippen. 2009. “K-12 Distance Educators at Work: Who’s Teaching Online
across the United States.” Journal of Research on Technology and Education 41 (4): 366–387.
doi:10.1080/15391523.2009.10782535.
Ayres, R. 2002. “Learner Attitudes toward the Use of CALL.” Computer-Assisted Language Learning
15 (3): 241–249. doi:10.1076/call.15.3.241.8189.
Bailey, E. 2011. “ADHD and Learning Disabilities: How Can You Help Your Child Cope with ADHD and
Subsequent Learning Difficulties? There Is a Way.” Israel Medical Association Journal 13: 571–574.
Barkley, R. 1997. “Behavioral Inhibition, Sustained Attention, and Executive Functions: Constructing
a Unifying Theory of ADHD.” Psychological Bulletin 121 (1): 65–94. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.65.
Barkley, R. 2014. “Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (Concentration Deficit Disorder?): Current Status,
Future Directions, and a Plea to Change the Name.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 42:
117–125. doi:10.1007/s10802-013-9824-y.
Bender, W. 1997. Understanding ADHD: A Practical Guide for Teachers and Parents. New Jersey:
Merrill/Prentice Hall.
12 T. LIONTOU

Brooks, R. 2002. “Changing the Mindset of Adults with ADHD: Strategies for Fostering Hope,
Optimism, and Resilience.” In Chap. 7 In Clinician’s Guide to Adult ADHD, edited by
S. Goldstein and A. T. Ellison, 127–146. San Diego: Academic Press.
Bulut, D., and A. F. AbuSeileek. 2006. “Learner Attitude toward CALL and Level of Achievement in
Basic Language Kills.” Journal of Institute of Social Sciences of Erciyes University 23 (2): 112–129.
Burt, S., R. Krueger, M. McGue, and W. Iacono. 2001. “Sources of Covariation among Attention-Deficit/
Hyperactivity Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, and Conduct Disorder: The Importance of
Shared Environment.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 110: 516–525. doi:10.1037/0021-
843X.110.4.516.
Chan, L., and P. Cole. 1986. “The Effects of Comprehension Monitoring Training on the Reading
Competence of Learning Disabled and Regular Class Students.” Remedial and Special Education
7: 33–40. doi:10.1177/074193258600700407.
Chujyo, K., and C. Nishigaki. 2005. “Creating E-Learning Material to Teach Essential Vocabulary for
Young EFL Learners.” Proceedings of IWLeL Conference 2004: An Interactive Workshop on
Language e- Learning, Tokyo, Waseda University Press. 35–44.
Clauss-Ehlers, C., ed. 2010. Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural School Psychology. USA: Springer Science
and Business Media.
Coghill, D. R., T. Banaschewski, C. Soutullo, M. G. Cottingham, and A. Zuddas. 2017. “Systematic
Review of Quality of Life and Functional Outcomes in Randomized Placebo-Controlled Studies
of Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.” European Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry 26: 1283–1307. doi:10.1007/s00787-017-0986-y.
Difino, S. M., and L. Lombardino. 2004. “Language Learning Disabilities: The Ultimate Foreign
Language Challenge.” Foreign Language Annals 37 (3): 390–400. doi:10.1111/flan.2004.37.issue-3.
DuPaul, G., and G. Stoner. 2002. “Interventions for Attention Problems.” In Interventions for
Academic and Behavior Problems II: Preventive and Remedial Approaches, edited by M. Shinn,
H. Walker, and G. Stoner, 913–938. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
DuPaul, G., and G. Stoner. 1994. ADHD in the Schools: Assessment and Intervention Strategies.
New York: Guilford Press.
Flick, G. 2010. Managing ADHD in the K-8 Classroom: A Teacher′S Guide. California: Corwin.
Foreman, D. M. 2006. “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Legal and Ethical Aspects.” Archives
of Disease in Childhood 91 (2): 192–194. doi:10.1136/adc.2004.064576.
Forness, S., and K. Kavale. 2001. “ADHD and a Return to the Medical Model of Special Education.”
Education and Treatment of Children 24 (3): 224–247.
Gersten, R., J. Williams, L. Fuchs, and S. Baker. 1998. “Improving Reading Comprehension for
Children with Learning Disabilities.” (Final Report: Section 1, U.S. Department of Education
Contract HS 921700). Washington, DC: Department of Education Press.
Goldstein, S., and A. Ellison. 2002. Clinicians’ Guide to Adult ADHD: Assessment and Intervention. San
Diego, California: Academic Press.
Greathead, P. 2010. “Language Disorders and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.” The
National Attention Deficit Disorder Information and Support Service, Accessed January 23
2018http://www.addiss.co.uk/languagedisorders.htm
Greenfield, R. 2003. “Collaborative E-Mail Exchange for Teaching Secondary ESL: A Case Study in
Hong Kong.” Language Learning & Technology 7 (1): 46–70.
Hallowell, E. 1994. Driven to Distraction: Recognizing and Coping with Attention Deficit Disorder from
Childhood through Adulthood. New Jersey: Simon & Schuster.
Herrington, J., and J. Parker. 2013. “Emerging Technologies as Cognitive Tools for Authentic
Learning.” British Journal of Educational Technology 44 (4): 607–615. doi:10.1111/bjet.12048.
Jensen, E. 2008. Brain-Based Learning: The New Paradigm in Teaching. California: Corwin.
Jensen, P., R. Shertvette, S. Zenakis, and J. Ritchters. 1993. “Anxiety and Depressive Disorders in
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity: New Findings.” American Journal of Psychiatry 150:
1203–1209. doi:10.1176/ajp.150.8.1203.
Johnson, C., and N. Viljoen. 2017. “Experiences of Two Multidisciplinary Team Members of Systemic
Consultations in a Community Learning Disability Service.” British Journal of Learning Disabilities
45 (3): 172–179. doi:10.1111/bld.2017.45.issue-3.
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 13

Klinger, J., S. Vaughn, and A. Boardman. 2007. Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with
Learning Difficulties. New York: Guilford Press.
Krashen, S. 1981. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kucer, S. 2001. Dimensions of Literacy. A Conceptual Base for Teaching Reading and Writing in School
Settings. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Lavoie, R. 2007. “Motivating the Child with Attention Deficit Disorder.” Accessed January 23 2018
http://www.ldonline.org/article/19975
Liontou, T. 2015. “Intermediate Greek EF Learners’ Attitudes to On-Line Teaching Practices: A Blended
Task-Based English Language Learning Approach.” Teaching English with Technology 15 (2): 81–93.
Lock, T., K. Worley, and M. Worlaich. 2008. “Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.” In Developmental-
Behavioral Pediatrics: Evidence and Practice, edited by M. Wolraich, D. Drotar, P. Dworkin, and E. Perrin,
579–601. Philadelphia: Monsby.
Macaruso, P., and A. Rodman. 2011. “Benefits of Computer-Assisted Instruction to Support Reading
Acquisition in English Language Learners.” Bilingual Research Journal 34 (3): 301–315.
doi:10.1080/15235882.2011.622829.
McIntyre, S., N. Mirriahi, and K. Watson. 2014. “Why Is Online Teaching Important?.” Learning to
Teach Online Course Material. Australia: University of New South Wales.
Mikami, A. Y. 2010. “The Importance of Friendship for Youth with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity
Disorder.” Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 13 (2): 181–198. doi:10.1007/s10567-010-0067-y.
Mortimore, T. 2008. Dyslexia and Learning Style: A Practitioner’s Handbook. England: John Wiley & Sons.
National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. 2009. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder:
Diagnosis and Management of ADHD in Children, Young People and Adults. Leicester: British
Psychological Society.
National Institute of Mental Health. 2016. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. USA: National
Institute of Mental Health Press.
Nijakowska, J. 2010. Dyslexia in the Foreign Language Classroom. UK: Multilingual Matters.
Parker, P., D. Maor, and J. Herrington. 2013. “Authentic Online Learning: Aligning Learner Needs,
Pedagogy and Technology.” Issues in Educational Research 23 (2): 227–241.
Polanczyk, G., M. S. de Lima, B. L. Horta, J. Biederman, and L. A. Rohde. 2007. “The Worldwide
Prevalence of ADHD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis.” American Journal of
Psychiatry 164 (6): 942–948. doi:10.1176/ajp.2007.164.6.942.
Renz, K., E. P. Lorch, R. Milich, G. Lemberger, A. Bodner, and R. Welsh. 2003. “Online Story Representation in
Boys with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 31: 93–104.
Richards, J., and T. Rodgers. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Robelia, B. 1997. “Tips for Working with ADHD Students of All Ages.” Journal of Experimental
Education 20 (1): 51–53. doi:10.1177/105382599702000109.
Schiller, E. 1996. “Educating Children with Attention Deficit Disorder.” Our Children 22 (2): 32–33.
Schonwald, A., and E. Lechner. 2006. “Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Complexities and
Controversies.” Current Opinion in Pediatrics 18 (2): 189–195. doi:10.1097/01.mop.0000193302.
70882.70.
Scruggs, T., and M. Mastropieri. 2000. “The Effectiveness of Mnemonic Instruction for Students with
Learning and Behavior Problems: An Update and Research Synthesis.” Journal of Behavioral
Education 10 (2/3): 163–173. doi:10.1023/A:1016640214368.
Silver, L. B. 2004. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. 3rd ed. USA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Snae, C., and M. Brueckner. 2008. “A Learner-Centered Multimedia-Enhanced System with Online
Assessment for Young Learners.” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on
eLearning for Knowledge-Based Society 2008. Bangkok, Thailand.
Sparks, R., L. Ganschow, J. Pohlman, S. Skinner, and M. Artzer. 1992. “The Effect of Multisensory
Structured Language Instruction on Native Language and Foreign Language Aptitude Skills of
At-Risk High School Foreign Language Learners.” Annals of Dyslexia 42: 25–53. doi:10.1007/
BF02654937.
14 T. LIONTOU

Spear-Swerling, L., and P. Owen-Brucker. 2006. “Teacher-Education Students’ Reading Abilities and
Their Knowledge about Word Structure.” Teacher Education and Special Education (TESE) 29 (2):
116–126. doi:10.1177/088840640602900204.
Sroubek, A., M. Kelly, and X. Li. 2013. “Inattentiveness in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.”
Neuroscience Bulletin 29 (1): 103–110. doi:10.1007/s12264-012-1295-6.
Stockman, I. 2009. Movement and Action in Learning and Development: Clinical Implications for
Pervasive Developmental Disorders. US: Academic Press.
Swanson, H., K. Harris, and S. Graham. 2004. Handbook of Learning Disabilities. New York: Guilford Press.
Swanson, H., and M. Hoskyn. 1998. “Experimental Intervention Research on Students with Learning
Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes.” Review of Educational Research 68:
277–321. doi:10.3102/00346543068003277.
Tannock, R. 2005. “Language and Mental Health Disorders: The Case of ADHD.” Accessed January
28 2018 http://www.cas.uio.no
Taylor, E. 2017. “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Over-Diagnosed or Diagnoses Missed?”
Archives of Disease in Childhood 102 (4): 376–379. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2016-310487.
Thapar, A., M. Cooper, O. Eyre, and K. Langley. 2013. “What Have We Learnt about the Causes of ADHD?”
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 54 (1): 3–16. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02611.x.
Thapar, A., M. Cooper, R. Jefferies, and E. Stergiakouli. 2012. “What Causes Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder?” Archives of Disease in Childhood 97 (3): 260–265. doi:10.1136/archdis-
child-2011-300482.
Tsagari, D., and I. Sperling. 2017. “Assessing SLLs with SpLDs: Challenges and Opportunities for
Equity in Education.” In Assessing L2 Students with Learning and Other Disabilities, edited by
D. Tsagari and G. Spanoudis, 175–188. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
Turketi, N. 2010. “Teaching English to Children with ADHD.” MA diss., School for International
Training Brattleboro, Vermont.
Williams, J. 2000. “Strategic Processing of Text: Improving Reading Comprehension for Students with
Learning Disabilities.” The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education (ERIC EC). ERIC/
OSEP Digest #E599.
Witton, C., J. Talcott, P. Hansen, A. Richardson, T. Griffiths, A. Rees, J. Stein, and G. Green. 1998.
“Sensitivity to Dynamic Auditory and Visual Stimuli Predicts Onward Reading Ability in Both
Dyslexic and Normal Readers.” Current Biology 8 (14): 791–797.
Yang, S. 2009. “Using Blogs to Enhance Critical Reflection and Community of Practice.” Educational
Technology & Society 12 (2): 11–21.

Appendix TELE Attitude Questionnaire

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research. Please answer the questionnaire as honestly
as you can. Don’t try to write what you think your teacher wants you to write; tell us what you
really think.
Section One
Background Information
Age:. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ...
Gender (please circle): Male Female
Place of residence:. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ..
Name of your school:. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .
How long have you been learning English?:. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .
What is your level in English? (please circle) A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
Have you taken English lessons in-group? (please circle) YES NO
Have you ever taken any private English lessons? (please circle) YES NO
Have you ever taken an exam in English? (please circle) YES NO
 EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION 15

If yes, which one? . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .If yes, when? . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ...

Did you pass it? . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .If yes, what was your score? . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ...
Do you own a Personal Computer (PC)? Yes [] No []
How proficient are you in using computers?
Very weak [] Weak [] Average [] Good [] Very good []
Have you passed a Computer Educational Course? Yes [] No []
How often do you use computers? Please circle the appropriate option.
(A) Less than once a week
(B) 1-2 times a week
(C) 3-4 times a week
(D) 5 or more times a week
What do you use computers for? Please circle the appropriate options.
(A) Electronic mail
(B) Computer Games
(C) Online shopping
(D) School projects
(E) Voice chat (Skype)
(F) Personal site or web blog
(G) Post Wikis
(H) Watch YouTube videos

Section Two
For the following 20 statements, please tick [√] the answer that best reflects your opinion. Please
note that there are NO right or wrong answers to the statements.
1. I can access extra information more easily during an online class.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
2. After taking an online EFL course, I know how to benefit from my PC to improve my English
language competence.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
3. An online class is a stress-free environment to learn English.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
4. I can get more feedback in online classes.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
5. An online course is an interesting way of learning English.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
6. I benefit more from the group/pair work in an online class.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
7. I feel comfortable enough to share my ideas in English during online classes.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
8. I can practice all language skills in an online environment.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
9. I know more about how to use computers after having taken an online EFL course.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
10. I can understand everything we do in our online EFL class.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
11. It takes less time to explain something during an online EFL lesson.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
12. I have become a better problem-solver after using the computer while learning English.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
13. The online EFL course has helped me become an independent learner.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
14. I do not have technical problems in using computers during online classes.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
16 T. LIONTOU

15. I prefer online to traditional face-to-face lessons for EFL classes.

Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
16. It is easy to access the meaning of words (e.g., use online dictionaries, pictures) to help me
understand what I read in my online EFL classes.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
17. In EFL reading courses, listening to the written text helps me comprehend better.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
18. I prefer to practice EFL reading comprehension via computers.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
19. Reading via computers is more interesting when supported with visual information.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].
20. It is easier to go back and forth in the online text to find relationships among ideas in it.
Strongly disagree [] Disagree [] Not sure [] Agree [] Strongly agree [].