Emergent Literacy

In the article “Touch Screen Tablets and Emergent Literacy”, by Michelle M. Neumann and David L. Neumann, they attempt to explain the benefits of touch screen tablets on promoting Emergent literacy, using various studies. Currently, we are living in a technologically advancing society, which is good news for the authors. Neumann and Neumann explored studies that show what touch screen tablets do for emergent literacy in children. Overall, after examining the studies, the authors suggest that tablets “have the potential to enhance children’s emergent literacy skills (e.g., alphabet knowledge, print concepts, and emergent writing) (Neumann & Neumann, 2014).
In the first section of the article, Neumann and Neumann, explain the various benefits
It’s evident that the studies included only showed potential advancements, and not long- term advancements in emergent literacy skills. There were some good findings from the studies, but not enough to make a definitive assessment of tablets and emergent literacy with long term effects. For example, in the Michael Cohen Group and USDOE 2011’s study, they showed the results of 2-8-year-olds, when asked to interact with touch screen tablets. Overall, this study found that “children progress from an immediate, concrete sensory experience, to a more conceptual and abstract understanding, to independent operation of the device through the use of apps” (Neumann & Neumann, 2014). In contrast, this statement makes tablets and emergent literacy seem concrete, but the actual study only used 60 children, making the validity of this research finding decrease. The bigger the research sample, the more valid a study becomes. Furthermore, in a quasi-experimental study, it discovered “The literacy apps were found to have a positive effect on letter sounds, rhyming, and vocabulary with 3-year-olds making the most gains (Neumann & Neumann, 2014). This study used 90 children, ages 3-7. This article makes the audience think literacy can be improved by using tablets, and educational apps. Neumann and Neumann used this quasi-experimental study to
They noted 3 types of apps including, gaming apps, creating apps, and electronic book apps. While it may seem as though the tablets have a lot to offer, it gets technical when using them properly to aid in emergent literacy. It was noted that children get frustrated, and lose interest if the app isn’t challenging enough. This article makes tablets seem as though they have a lot to offer, but when considering the developmental level of each individual child, and trying to pair them with the proper app, it can become arduous. Also, with the limitation of apps, it doesn’t seem there are enough substantial apps to fully help every child with emergent literacy. In addition, it was stated, “Out of 315 Apple apps examined by Orrin and Olcese (2011) only 56 were categorized under the Education heading, thus making educational apps limited, and the individuality of each student unlimited. In continuum, Neumann and Neumann explain the recommended literacy apps, and the criteria needed when selecting apps. Overall, the apps need to guide children socially, emotionally, physically, and cognitively. This section of the paper lists multiple findings that sound as though they contain high reliability, and validity; yet state multiple times that more empirical research needs to be done to ensure the