Students with special educational needs (SEN) face significant challenges in acquiring literacy skills, particularly in mainstream educational settings that follow traditional instruction, which may not fully support their needs. These challenges relate to letter recognition, word decoding, reading fluency and comprehension and are mainly caused by learning disabilities such as dyslexia, various speech and language impairments, or cognitive disabilities.

Assistive technologies, like text-to-speech software, digital text highlighting, and interactive e-books, provide an opportunity to make reading instruction more accessible, personalized, and engaging. 

Text-to-speech applications have certain features of exceptional value for phonics instruction. One such feature is the multimedia component that facilitates audio-visual integration at the linguistic units’ level, thus reinforcing them for the struggling reader. Using syllables as processing units in word recognition instead of phonemes has proven effective (Müller et al., 2020) in enhancing decoding skills by progressing from single-letter phonological recoding to larger units. As children with reading disabilities often have poor working memory, audio-visual cues of syllables will partially compensate for it, allowing them to succeed in recoding words based on them rather than phonemes. In time, through systematic instruction, they build fluency in decoding words and are able to focus on comprehension. 

In Romanian educational curricula, reading instruction is grounded in phonetic analysis and synthesis methodology. This approach is promoted through ABC textbooks that systematically increase reading task complexity with each successive letter of the alphabet over the course of an academic year. The progression ensures that by the end of first grade, students attain mastery of all the letters, subsequently cultivating reading fluency and the ability to decode increasingly complex polysyllabic words. 

The main focus of this study was to develop a digital reading program based on assistive technologies designed to enhance reading skills in SEN students and to explore the relationship between using these technologies in one-to-one reading instruction and the proficiency levels achieved in order to assess how effective these technologies are in honing reading skills in SEN students.

The questions this research tries to address are how effective assistive technologies are in improving literacy skills (letter recognition, word decoding, fluency, and comprehension) in students with SEN and to what extent their use influences students’ motivation and engagement in literacy-based learning activities?

Present research objectives include developing and implementing a digital literacy intervention program that incorporates assistive technologies such as text-to-speech applications and visual text highlighting, investigating the relationship between the use of assistive technology and improvements in literacy skills among SEN students, as well as assessing the impact of these technologies on students' motivation and engagement.

The study is grounded in two key educational theories:

1. Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1994), which posits that learning effectiveness is influenced by the amount of cognitive effort required to process new information. We propose that text-to-speech apps reduce cognitive load by providing multimodal input, thus allowing students to focus on comprehension rather than decoding.

2. Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2008) promotes flexible learning environments that tend to every learner’s needs.

Both theories support the hypothesis that assistive technologies have the potential to enhance literacy skills as well as motivation, leading to improved academic outcomes and inclusive learning environments.

This study employs a quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test design with a sample consisting of 100 primary school students divided into two groups: an experimental group (n = 50), which receives digital literacy intervention, and a control group (n = 50), which follows traditional literacy instruction. The experimental group engages with a technology-enhanced literacy program, incorporating text-to-speech software and interactive text-highlighting applications. These assistive technologies aim to reduce cognitive load, improve reading fluency, and enhance comprehension by providing multimodal input that supports struggling readers. In contrast, the control group follows standard literacy instruction without technological interventions, allowing researchers to assess the added value of assistive technologies. This design enables both intra-group (pre- and post-intervention) and inter-group (experimental vs. control) comparisons, providing insight into whether the digital interventions lead to measurable improvements in literacy skills and motivation. To assess the effectiveness of the intervention, data is collected using standardized literacy assessments like the DDE-2 Battery (Romanian Standardized Test) and the MT®-2 Reading Test To interpret the collected data, both descriptive and inferential statistical methods will be applied. Descriptive statistics will include measures such as mean, standard deviation, and frequency distributions. Inferential statistics will include paired t-tests in order to compare pre-and post-intervention performance within the experimental group, determining whether students experience significant improvements after exposure to assistive technologies. Independent t-tests will examine differences between the experimental and control groups, providing evidence of whether assistive technologies lead to superior literacy outcomes compared to traditional instruction. Regression analysis will explore the relationships between assistive technology use, literacy improvement, and motivation, assessing whether increased engagement correlates with measurable gains in reading ability. By employing this comprehensive methodological approach, the study aims to provide empirical evidence on the role of assistive technologies in enhancing literacy skills and fostering motivation in students with SEN, ultimately contributing to the development of more inclusive and effective educational practices.

It is expected that SEN students using assistive technologies will exhibit: Improved literacy performance, as measured by the selected instruments: Letter recognition and decoding (due to text-to-speech support). Reading fluency (enhanced by real-time visual cues and spoken-word synchronization). Comprehension (as cognitive load is reduced, allowing focus on understanding rather than decoding). Increased motivation and engagement in learning activities, as evidenced by: Higher levels of participation in reading tasks Reduced frustration and task abandonment/refusal Positive attitudes toward reading activities The study has the potential to improve current educational policies regarding inclusion and to contribute to improving inclusion practices.

1.Bone, E. K., & Bouck, E. C. (2017). Accessible text-to-speech options for students who struggle with reading. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1188366 2.Gonzalez, M. (2014). The Effect of Embedded Text-To-Speech And Vocabulary Ebook Scaffolds on The Comprehension of Students With Reading Disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 29(3). http://www.internationalsped.com/ijse/article/view/13 3.Grunér, S., Östberg, P., & Hedenius, M. (2018). The Compensatory Effect of Text-to-Speech Technology on Reading Comprehension and Reading Rate in Swedish Schoolchildren With Reading Disability: The Moderating Effect of Inattention and Hyperactivity Symptoms Differs by Grade Groups. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(2), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417742898 4.Ibrahim, I. R. A.-S., & Alfal, M. A. S. A. (2024). Leveraging Assistive Technology in Language Learning: The Effectiveness of Text-to-Speech (TTS) on improving Phonemic Awareness and Orthographic Knowledge of Dyslexic Children, 560–603. https://doi.org/10.21608/musi.2024.290580.1161 5.Ikeshita, H., Yamaguchi, S., Morioka, T., & Yamazoe, T. (2018). Effects of Highlighting Text on the Reading Ability of Children with Developmental Dyslexia: A Pilot Study. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13(09), 239. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i09.8736 6.Keelor, J. L., Creaghead, N., Silbert, N., & Horowitz-Kraus, T. (2020, March 1). Text-to-Speech Technology: Enhancing Reading Comprehension for Students with Reading Difficulty. | Assistive Technology Outcomes & Benefits (ATOB) | EBSCOhost. https://openurl.ebsco.com/contentitem/gcd:154165569?sid=ebsco:plink:crawler&id=ebsco:gcd:154165569 7.Nordström, T., Nilsson, S., Gustafson, S., & Svensson, I. (2019). Assistive technology applications for students with reading difficulties: Special education teachers’ experiences and perceptions. Disability and Rehabilitation. Assistive Technology, 14(8), 798–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1499142 8.Park, H. J., Takahashi, K., Roberts, K. D., & Delise, D. (2017). Effects of text-to-speech software use on the reading proficiency of high school struggling readers. Assistive Technology, 29(3), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2016.1171808 9.Svensson, I., Nordström, T., Lindeblad, E., Gustafson, S., Björn, M., Sand, C., Almgren/Bäck, G., & Nilsson, S. (2021). Effects of assistive technology for students with reading and writing disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 16(2), 196–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2019.1646821 10.Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5 11.Wet, F. de, Marais, L., & Klop, D. (2015). Text-to-speech enhanced ebooks for emerging literacy development. 173–177. https://doi.org/10.21437/SLaTE.2015-30 12.Young, M. C., Courtad, C. A., Douglas, K. H., & Chung, Y.-C. (2019). The Effects of Text-to-Speech on Reading Outcomes for Secondary Students With Learning Disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 34(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418786047