14 THE EFFECTS OF AMIRA LEARNING ON LITERACY DEVELOPMENT IN EARLY CH

AID 1833285 · View on Simbli

Agenda Item

g. Purchase of Amira Tutor, Supplemental High-Dosage Tutoring (Not to exceed $600,000)

Summary: Presented by: Ms. Stacy E. Stepney, Chief Academic Officer, Division of Curriculum and Instruction
Request: It is requested that the Board of Education approve the purchase of Amira Tutor, a high-dosage, research-based tutoring program to support foundational reading skills, fluency, and reading comprehension development in kindergarten through third grade, in an amount not to exceed $600,000.
Why: The DeKalb County School District (DCSD) administers the Northwest Evaluation Association Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) three times per year. The 2025 spring MAP Fluency data results in the areas of phonics and word recognition are as follows:




Phonics and Word Recognition


Grade
Below Expectation
Approaching Expectation
Meets Expectation
Exceeds Expectation


Kindergarten
27%
16%
25%
32%


First
52%
46%
2%
0%


Second
96%
0%
4%
0%


Third
95%
0%
5%
0%




Amira ISIP is the Georgia Department of Education’s approved reading and dyslexia screener provided to local school districts at no cost. The District is seeking to adopt and purchase Amira Tutor, a supplemental tutoring program that algins directly to the Amira Assess. Amira Tutor will provide high-dosage, evidence-based, AI-guided, 1:1 tutoring to support teaching and learning. Real-time micro interventions are individualized and use research-based techniques and explicit decoding strategies to enhance foundational reading skills.

Pursuant to Board Policy DJE (III.D.3.g.2), the purchase of Amira Tutor does not require a competitive bid because it meets the policy definition of supplemental resources needed for instruction. In addition, Amira Tutor was evaluated and selected by qualified professional personnel based on sound pedagogical judgment and in the school district’s best interest.
Details: Amira ISIP provides a comprehensive and culturally responsive assessment system that evaluates key early literacy components such as phonological awareness, decoding, fluency, and comprehension-many of which can be completed in 15-20 minutes. The voice-enabled technology listens as students read aloud, detects errors with high reliability and validity, and generates actionable data reports that support differentiated instruction and early identification of reading difficulties, including dyslexia risk.

Amira acts in three essential roles: a dyslexia screener and diagnostic tool, a skilled instructional assistant, and a personalized reading coach. These roles are particularly valuable for early learners who benefit from responsive, individualized practice grounded in the science of reading.

For educators, Amira Tutor enhances classroom efficiency by allowing small group, whole group, or individual support by delivering immediate feedback through an AI-powered 1:1 tutor. For students, Amira Tutor fosters independence and engagement through interactive read-aloud experiences and real-time positive reinforcement. This tool is especially effective for supporting diverse learners thanks to its universal design features and multilingual sensitivity.

Overall, Amira Tutor empowers K-3 teachers with the data and tools needed to deliver responsive instruction, monitor progress, and close early literacy gaps, making it an asset in building foundational reading proficiency across all student groups. The selection of the Amira Tutor followed a two-round review process:


Round 1 (March 17, 2025): The five GADOE approved vendors presented their universal reading and dyslexia screener in person. A total of 15 participants attended, including central office coordinators, directors, assistant superintendents, and chiefs. Participants provided structured feedback and posed questions regarding instructional design, alignment with science of reading, and support for differentiated instruction of each resource.



Round 2 (April 3, 2025): Vendors addressed specific questions that arose in Round 1.
Financial impact: The total contract amount will not exceed $600,000.




120.2100.553200.26021.7210.1613.8010.035.2025
GEER II Dyslexia
Communication-Web Subscription


100-1000-553200-00011-7580-9990-8010-035-000
Communication-Web Subscription


100-2220-530000-00011-7580-9990-8010-035-0000
Purchased Professional/Technical Services
Contact: Ms. Stacy E. Stepney, Chief Academic Officer, Division of Curriculum & Instruction, 678-676-0731
Dr. Sean R. Tartt, Deputy Chief Academic Officer, Division of Curriculum & Instruction, 678-676-0731
Dr. Penny Mosley, Assistant Superintendent K-5 Curriculum & Instruction, Division of Curriculum & Instruction, 678-676-0137
Dr. Lynn Angus Ramos, Director, Literacy, Division of Curriculum & Instruction, 678-676-0136
Mrs. Lummie Baker, Director, Educational Media and Instructional Materials, Division of Curriculum & Instruction, 678-676-2421
Effective: July 15, 2025- June 30, 2026
Status: Approved by Office of Legal Affairs
Louisiana State University
LSU Scholarly Repository

LSU Doctoral Dissertations                                                                       Graduate School


10-27-2023

THE EFFECTS OF AMIRA LEARNING ON LITERACY
DEVELOPMENT IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Caroline C. Tolentino
Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge




Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations


Recommended Citation
Tolentino, Caroline C., "THE EFFECTS OF AMIRA LEARNING ON LITERACY DEVELOPMENT IN EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION" (2023). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 6280.
https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/6280


This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Scholarly Repository. It
has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU
Scholarly Repository. For more information, please contactgradetd@lsu.edu.
THE EFFECTS OF AMIRA LEARNING ON LITERACY
DEVELOPMENT IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION




                       A Dissertation


          Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
              Louisiana State University and
            Agriculture and Mechanical College
                in partial fulfillment of the
              requirements for the degree of
                   Doctor of Philosophy



                             in

                  The School of Education




                             by
                   Caroline C. Tolentino
          B.A., University of the Philippines, 2004
          M.Ed., Louisiana State University, 2017
          Ed.S., Louisiana State University, 2020
                      December 2023
 © 2023/copyright
Caroline C. Tolentino
 All rights reserved




         ii
                                ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


       I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the many individuals who have supported

and guided me throughout the journey of completing this dissertation. First and foremost, I am

profoundly thankful to my dissertation advisor, Dr. Cynthia DiCarlo, for her unwavering support,

invaluable expertise, and endless patience. Her guidance and mentorship have been instrumental

in shaping the direction of this research. I extend my heartfelt appreciation to the members of my

dissertation committee, Dr. Eugene Kennedy and Dr. Jennifer Qian, for their constructive

feedback, insightful suggestions, and dedication to ensuring the quality of this work. To Dr.

Andrew Webb and Dr. Shawndaya Thrasher, for their interest in my work and willingness to

serve on my committee.


       I am grateful to my friends who provided me with a network of support and camaraderie

throughout this journey. Their encouragement and shared experiences have lightened the load.


       I am indebted to my family for their boundless encouragement and understanding during

the demanding phases of this academic pursuit. Their unwavering belief in my abilities has been

my constant motivation. I am truly fortunate to have had such a strong support system, and for

that, I am deeply thankful.


       To God Almighty, I am forever grateful.




                                                iii
                                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLDEGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... iii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ v

CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER TWO. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 11

CHAPTER THREE. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 40

CHAPTER FOUR. RESULTS ................................................................................................... 56

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS ....................................................... 67

APPENDIX A. CENTRAL TENDENCY TABLES AND FIGURES ……………..……........ 83

APPENDIX B. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD ............................................................. 87

APPENDIX C. INFORMED CONSENT FORMS ….................................................................88

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 92

VITA .......................................................................................................................................... 101




                                                                        iv
                                         ABSTRACT


       The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of an Artificial Intelligence

software, Amira Learning, on literacy development in early childhood education. Specifically,

the research investigated the impact of Amira Learning software usage, the feedback it provided,

and teachers' perspectives on its alignment with the Science of Reading. The study employed

quantitative analyses of oral reading fluency outcomes and compared the pretest and posttest

scores of the students after the 6-week usage of the software.




                                                 v
                           CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION


       The Covid-19 pandemic posed a challenge in education that no nation in the world was

prepared to tackle. It took a toll on human resources, risking physical and mental wellbeing of

students and teachers, disrupted the normal teaching and learning cycle, and had everyone

thinking of ways to safely continue educating students. During this unprecedented event, leaders

at the school, district, and state levels all turned to educational technology to try to create

normalcy for teachers and students.


       Although there were conflicting thoughts on the acceptance of educational technology

(Straker, et al., 2018), the threats caused by the pandemic to the educational system opened the

doors to what it has to offer. Technology was used in varied ways in education, even in early

childhood education (ECE). It was used to deliver remote learning and to instruct in real time, to

electronically store resources, assessments, and data, and for interventions or supplemental

activities through applications and software. More recently, artificial intelligence (AI) for

educational use also garnered attention from students, teachers, school leaders, and stakeholders

because of its promising capabilities. The power of AI in education (AIEd) lies in its ability to

allow teachers and students to use machines that mimic human intelligence in computer

programs (McCarthy, 2007).


       In ECE where high-quality learning experiences and interactions are a golden standard,

programs that can replicate human intelligence such as intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) sound

encouraging especially because Covid-19 depleted human capital in education with schools not

allowing volunteers and members of the community to provide additional services for students.

Covid-19 has been predicted to cause learning loss (Sabates, et al.., 2021) and believed to widen


                                                   1
already existing learning gaps especially for the most vulnerable groups (Hoofman & Secord,

2021; Van Lancker & Parolin, 2020). The present study aimed to investigate the effects of an AI

program, Amira Learning software, on literacy development in early childhood education. Amira

Learning software claims to help young learners develop their literacy skills through constant

practice and interaction with the animated tutor, Amira.


                                      Significance of Study


       The significance of the present study was aimed at understanding the potential impact of

using Amira Learning software on young learners' literacy development. As AIEd continued to

play an increasingly significant role in the learning process (Broda & Frank, 2015; Touretzky, et

al., 2019; Yang, 2022) and as educators drew more interest in using ITS in educational setting, a

number of researchers offered meta-analysis and review of ITS and its effects on learning

outcomes (Ma, et al. 2014; Mousavinasab, et al., 2021; Nickow, et al., 2020,; Su & Yang, 2022).

The present study aimed to explore some of its important implications.


       The findings of the present study may shed light on the effectiveness of an ITS in

improving overall literacy of young learners as evidenced by improvement in oral reading

fluency (ORF). This knowledge can be valuable for educators and educational institutions

considering the integration of such technologies into their instructional practices. With Amira

Learning software’s promise of literacy growth, the present study can also contribute to

evidence-based literacy instruction strategies and may provide insights into how ITS can support

and enhance students' reading abilities. If the study revealed a positive relationship between time

spent using Amira Learning software and oral reading fluency, it could emphasize the

importance of personalized learning experiences tailored to individual students' needs and


                                                 2
learning preferences, through means other than the traditional, human tutor. Based on what the

findings will be, educational institutions may consider allocating resources and time to

incorporate Amira Learning software or similar technologies as part of their literacy curriculum.


                                      Purpose of the Study


       The purpose of this present study was to investigate the potential relationship between the

amount of time students spend using Amira Learning software and their literacy development as

measured by oral reading fluency (ORF) achievement levels. It also aimed to investigate how

effective Amira Learning software’s feedback was in improving students’ oral reading fluency.

The present study intended to collect and analyze survey data from teachers to understand their

views on how well Amira Learning software incorporates evidence-based reading instruction

methods outlined in the Science of Reading (SOR) framework. The present study hoped to have

achieved the following objectives:

       Examine the Use of Amira Learning Software. The present study gathered data on the

time spent by students using Amira Learning software while practicing reading grade level texts.

This data will help determine the extent of exposure to this ITS. The amount of feedback in

minutes that Amira Learning software provided will also be collected and compared to students’

oral reading fluency levels.

       Assess Oral Reading Fluency Levels. The present study aimed to measure students' oral

reading fluency levels before and after using Amira Learning software using the assessment and

data management system, DIBELS Next (www.acadiencelearning.org, n.d.). By comparing the

fluency levels to Amira Learning software usage and feedback given, the study sought to identify

any potential relationship between the variables.


                                                3
       Analyze the Relationships. The present study statistically analyzed the data collected to

determine whether there was a significant relationship between the time spent using Amira

Learning software and learners' oral reading fluency achievement levels as well as amount of

Amira Learning software feedback and oral reading fluency achievement levels.

       Interpret Teacher’s View on Amira Learning software and SOR Alignment. The

present study investigated and assessed the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira

Learning software's alignment to SOR and its effectiveness in fulfilling the SOR objectives

through an online survey.

       Contribute to Educational Research. The present study investigated the impact of

Amira Learning software, an AI-enabled ITS that claims to be aligned with SOR, to literacy

development of students in first grade level in a suburban public school in Louisiana. Being

aligned with the state’s literacy vision and with the forward trend in AIEd, it was hoped that this

study will set the foundation for further, wider scale research in the future. The impact of Amira

Learning software to literacy development and teachers' perspectives on its alignment to SOR

can have implications for the successful integration of AIEd, in the form of ITS, helping

educators and researchers make informed decisions about the use of this technology in literacy

instruction and supporting evidence-based practices in educational settings.

                                       Research Questions

       In order to investigate the effects of Amira Learning software, an Artificial Intelligence

(AI) program, on the literacy development in early childhood education, the following questions

supported this study:




                                                 4
       RQ1: What is the relationship between the time spent using Amira Learning software and

learners' oral reading fluency achievement levels?


       RQ2: How effective is the feedback provided by Amira Learning software in improving

students’ oral reading fluency?

       RQ3: What is the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning

software’s alignment to the Science of Reading and its effectiveness in fulfilling the Science of

Reading objectives?


Theoretical Framework


       To fully explore the relationship of Amira Learning software and early learners' reading

skills, it was essential to consider two overarching concepts: the mastery learning (Bloom, 1968)

and skilled reader (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Scarborough, 2001; National Reading Panel, 2000).

       The mastery learning theory aims to address individual learning differences, promote

deeper understanding, and ensure that students are well-prepared for more advanced topics. It

has been influential in shaping the field of education, particularly in the design of personalized

and competency-based learning models (Guskey, 2005). Mastery learning is regarded as a means

to promote educational fairness by enabling every student to attain a high level of expertise in the

subject matter.

       The Skilled Reader theory, often associated with cognitive psychology and reading

research, seeks to understand and describe the cognitive processes and skills that proficient

readers use when they read and comprehend text. It is supported by three distinct models , the

Simple View of Reading (SVR) (Gough & Tunmer (1986), Scarborough's Reading Rope (2001),


                                                 5
and the Five Pillars of Reading (National Reading Panel, 2005), which collectively provide a

comprehensive insight into the various components involved in the reading process. Although

each of these models has its own unique characteristics, they all share a fundamental recognition

that reading is a complex undertaking characterized by two essential elements: decoding and

comprehension. Additionally, these frameworks all acknowledge that reading skills develop in a

hierarchical fashion, with foundational skills forming the building blocks for more advanced

ones.

Limitations & Delimitations

        Although the real-world, quasi-experimental design has several advantages, specifically

when conducting experimental control is challenging or unethical (Grimshaw, et al., 2000), it has

some limitations that may affect the results of the present study. One of the limitations included

not involving random assignment of participants to groups, which can lead to potential biases

and can make it difficult to establish causal relationships between the independent variable and

the outcomes. The non-random assignment of participants to groups may also result in

systematic differences between the groups, affecting the internal validity of the study. Another

limitation involved the participants selected based on extreme scores at the beginning of the

study who may naturally move toward the average on subsequent measurements, leading to

regression to the mean and potentially misinterpretation of the intervention's impact (Harris, et

al., 2006).

        Feasibility and practicality are two of the delimitations of quasi-experimental studies. It

is often more practical and feasible than true experimental designs, especially in situations where

random assignment to groups is not possible or ethical. This makes them more accessible for

researchers working in real-world settings with existing groups or natural occurrences. This

                                                 6
design also allows researchers to examine cause-and-effect relationships without compromising

ethical principles (Grimshaw, et al., 2000). Because the topic of AIEd in the form of ITS in early

childhood education has not been fully explored yet, quasi-experimental studies can serve as a

basis for generating hypotheses that can later be tested using more controlled experimental

designs. Quasi-experimental design is best suited for the present study for these reasons.

       Overall, quasi-experimental designs offer researchers a valuable approach to study causal

relationships in situations where true experimental control is not feasible (Grimshaw, et al.,

2000; Harris, et al., 2006). By understanding the strengths and limitations of these designs,

researchers can use them effectively to address important research questions and contribute to

evidence-based practices in various fields.


Definition of Key Terms

        The following terms were used as they applied to this study. They are defined hereafter.

       Artificial Intelligence (AI). McCarthy (2007), defined AI as “the science and engineering

of making intelligent machines, especially intelligent computer programs'' (p. 2). This definition

seems to encompass a broad description of what AI truly is. It can be challenging to find a

specific, direct definition for the term since AI has been around for more than a decade in many

forms and applications (Lindner & Romeike, 2019). The common description of AI lies in its

ability to understand and mimic human actions and thinking through reasoning, adapting,

recognizing patterns, making predictions, recommendations, and decisions to solve complex

problems (ISTE, 2019, 0:28; Lindner & Romeike, 2019; Unicef, 2020).

       Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd). AIEd refers to the application of artificial

intelligence (AI) technologies and techniques in the field of education. It aims to enhance and


                                                 7
improve various aspects of the educational process by leveraging AI's capabilities to analyze

data, make predictions, and adapt to individual learners' needs (Artificial Intelligence and the

Future of Teaching and Learning Insights and Recommendations, 2023)

       Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS). ITS is an advanced educational technology that uses

artificial intelligence (AI) and computer-based instruction to provide personalized and adaptive

learning experiences to students. ITS is designed to simulate the role of a human tutor, delivering

individualized instruction and support to learners based on their specific needs and progress

(Luckin, et.al., 2016).

       Science of Reading (SOR). The Science of Reading is an evidence-based approach to

reading instruction that draws on extensive research from various disciplines, including cognitive

psychology, linguistics, neuroscience, and education. It seeks to understand how reading

develops in the brain and how best to teach reading skills effectively (Moats, 1999; Moats 2020;

Science of Reading: Defining Guide, 2022).

       Early literacy skills. Early literacy skills are the fundamental abilities that young children

develop during their early childhood years, which are essential for future reading and writing

success. These skills serve as the foundation for becoming proficient readers and writers as

children progress through their education. The Science of Reading includes the following

measures of early literacy skills: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary,

comprehension.

       Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Next edition. DIBELS Next

are a set of research-based procedures and measures for assessing the acquisition of early literacy

skills. They are designed to be short fluency measures used to regularly monitor the development


                                                 8
of early literacy skills and early reading skills (www. Acadiencelearning.org, n.d.). In first grade,

DIBELS Next assess the measures of phoneme segmentation, nonsense word fluency, and oral

reading fluency. It uses four levels of risk to categorize students' performance on the assessment.

These risk levels help educators identify students who may need additional support or

intervention in developing their early literacy skills. The risk levels are typically classified as

follows: low risk (green and blue; students who are performing at or above grade level), some

risk (yellow; students who are performing slightly below grade level), and at risk (red; students

who are performing significantly below grade level).

       Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). ORF as measured by DIBELS Next refers to a specific

assessment used to evaluate a student's reading proficiency. In the DIBELS ORF assessment, a

student is asked to read a grade-level passage aloud for one minute. The evaluator records the

number of words the student reads correctly within that time frame. It focuses on accuracy and

rate of reading.

       Word Correct Per Minute (WCPM). WCPM is a metric used to measure ORF in

educational assessments, particularly in the context of DIBELS Next. WCPM represents the

number of words a student reads correctly in one minute during an ORF assessment. The

assessment typically involves having the student read a grade-level passage aloud, and the

evaluator records the number of words read accurately within the one-minute time frame.

                                              Summary

       This chapter presented the global challenges that Covid-19 posed in education. Amidst

the challenges, educational technology emerged as a crucial tool to continue teaching and

learning, although there were differing opinions on its acceptance, specifically in ECE.


                                                   9
Educational technology has advanced with AIEd which has opened a whole new way of

enhancing learning experiences for young students with human intelligence capabilities. An AI

program, Amira Learning software, promises to close learning gaps and support students’

literacy development using explicit instruction and tutoring that is aligned with SOR. As

Louisiana focused on improving the literacy rates of students from kindergarten to third grade

through SOR, the impact of Amira Learning software on literacy development was worth

investigating.

       Chapter Two, a review of literature, the existing literature on the predicted effects of

Covid-19 on education, the role of educational technology in ECE in relation to the pandemic,

AI and ITS, Amira Learning software and SOR, as well as the theoretical framework for the

present study are explored.

       In Chapter Three, details about the present study and how the topic will be investigated

are presented. The intended research paradigm, setting and context, ethical considerations, data

sources, data analysis, and research design are included.




                                                10
                     CHAPTER TWO. LITERATURE REVIEW

       In December 2019, the entire world was shocked by the news of a new virus, Covid-19,

that was highly contagious and caused infectious illness and sudden death. It claimed close to

seven million lives worldwide and infected more than half a billion people from all walks of life

(World Health Organization, 2023). In the first quarter of 2020, Covid-19 caused the world to

completely shut down, disrupting every industry and challenging every aspect of the society,

including the educational system. Since then, technology has come a long way and its adoption

in different industries has speeded as part of the responses to the pandemic (LaBerge, et.al.,

2020). This has also resulted in rapid advancements in educational technology. Currently, the

most popular yet most controversial educational technology is artificial intelligence in education

(AIEd). AIEd has raised both praises and disagreements especially in early childhood education

(ECE). Nonetheless, developers continued to attempt to create appropriate AIEd tools in ECE

(Broda & Frank, 2015; Touretzky, et al., 2019; Yang, 2022).

       AIEd has made its way to many states. In Louisiana, the Department of Education

(LDOE) promoted the use of Amira Learning software, an AIEd Intelligent Tutoring System

(ITS) program to help English Learners (ELs) to master literacy skills necessary for school

success. Amira Learning software claims to provide effective tutoring to young learners and to

close learning gaps through instruction and feedback that are aligned with the Science of

Reading (SOR). With about 900 school districts in 15 countries using Amira Learning software

and a program that alleges to be backed by research (www.amiralearning.com, n.d.),

independently published studies on the effects of Amira Learning software did not seem to be

available on academic search engines yet. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of

an AI program, Amira Learning, on literacy development in early childhood education.

                                                11
       To better understand and explain the importance of this study, this review of literature

explored and analyzed current research associated with the effects of Covid-19 to the educational

system, the different views on educational technology and AIEd, studies involving ITS and

literacy development, and a brief overview of SOR. A wide range of scholarly sources including

academic journals, books, and reputable online databases were used to provide a comprehensive

understanding of this topic and to identify gaps or areas for future research. For the purpose of

fairness, Amira Learning software inhouse, company-funded research on their program will not

be presented in this chapter, but will be used to analyze data for the present study.

                           Covid-19 and Early Childhood Education

       In December 2019, an unfamiliar strain of the airborne virus Severe Acute Respiratory

Syndrome (SARS) was reported about 7,000 miles away from the United States in Wuhan,

China. In a few months’ time, the virus, now known as Covid-19, has caused a global pandemic

and has shut the world down, significantly affecting all industries and sectors such as healthcare,

manufacturing and retail, travel and tourism, labor and employment, and education.

       Covid-19 undeniably threatened the physical and mental well-being of teachers and

students, but research suggested that there were other pressing issues that the pandemic posed on

the education system. Although the effects of Covid-19 can be observed in all levels in

education, the extent to which the pandemic impacted each level of education varied. In ECE,

where developmentally appropriate high-quality learning experiences are linked to children’s

holistic development and future success (Britto, 2015; Bredekamp, 2020, UNICEF, 2020),

school closures in 2020 proved to be problematic.




                                                 12
Early Childhood Education, Remote Learning, and Educational Technology

Remote Learning

       School closures disrupted social interactions, isolated young students, and limited their

learning experiences which presented threats to their overall welfare and academic achievement

(Golberstein & Miller, 2020). At the midst of the pandemic, the majority of the countries in the

world opted for remote learning to continue educating students safely from their home. However,

only 60% of these countries implemented support for ECE, despite recognizing the crucial

development of young children during these early stages (UNICEF, 2020). At that time, young

children were believed to be at a lower risk of developing and transmitting the virus, hence, they

were not at the center of public discussions and planning (Dias, et al., 2020).

       For countries that implemented remote learning in ECE, the challenge was on adult

engagement because young students were not able to manage remote learning independently,

therefore, their online learning experiences mainly depended on the adults at home. During this

time, the inequities in ECE were also observed in the areas of teacher training, technology

availability, and quality of resources and materials for use while students were at home (Dias, et

al., 2020; Ford, et al., 2021). All of these affected the standard of teaching and learning during

the pandemic.

       The absence of high-quality enriching activities and experiences in ECE during the peak

of the pandemic was beyond concerning. At that time, young children were not believed to be

super transmitters of Covid-19, which naturally led state leaders to deal with the more vulnerable

groups putting ECE on the backburner of Covid-19 discussions(Dias, et al., 2020). Interestingly,

a published study by the Journal of Pediatrics “refuted the idea that children were at minimal


                                                 13
risk, providing new evidence that children can have higher levels of virus and transmit COVID-

19 more than adults in intensive care units” (Dias, et.al., 2020, p. 39). This played a role in

decisions about continuing remote learning or reintroducing face-to-face instruction.

Learning Loss

       It was presumed that when students are given extended breaks, whether it be weather-

related disruptions or summer vacation, they experience the usual learning loss where they are

predicted to regress and lose some knowledge and skills that were previously acquired during the

school year (Dorn, et al., 2021; Poletti, 2020). With about five months of school closures and

remote learning, education experts predicted that Covid-19 will cause learning loss (Sabates, et

al., 2021) and will widen already existing learning gaps especially for the most vulnerable groups

(Hoofman & Secord, 2021; Van Lancker & Parolin, 2020).

       In an analysis of Covid-19’s effect on K-12 students, Dorn, et al.. (2021), found that the

impact on their learning was substantial with an average setback of five months in mathematics

and four months in reading by the end of the 2020-2021 school year. The authors also confirmed

that the pandemic exacerbated the already existing learning gaps due to factors such as economic

status, disabilities, students’ primary language, and other physical, mental, or emotional issues.

The widening of the existing academic gaps was also observed by Dias, et al. (2020). The

authors interviewed 26 early childhood teachers from different countries across Latin and North

America about their experiences in teaching during the pandemic. They emphasized that remote

learning, to provide young children with meaningful learning experiences, had to be “more

dynamic and less teacher-centered” (p. 41). In a study that Hoffman and Secord (2021)

conducted, they suggested that Covid-19 “will continue to affect the delivery of knowledge and



                                                 14
skills at all levels of education” (p. 1076) and although some students may adapt to new modes

of learning, they still need the guidance and support to continue with the new normal.

Educational Technology

          Despite facing the adverse effects of the pandemic, early childhood educators and

advocates strived to find ways to provide the youngest students the developmentally appropriate,

high-quality learning experiences that they deserve while maintaining their safety from the virus

(Ford, et al., 2021). As a solution to this dilemma, world leaders opted for remote learning using

educational technology during the pandemic.

          For the past few decades, there has been an ongoing dispute about the benefits and

consequences of integrating technology in the classroom, and whether or not to accept

technological transformation (Straker, et al., 2018). Although this topic remained open to

discussions (Jeong & Kim, 2017), current developments and circumstances have shifted the

focus of educational technology. As early as April 2020, UNESCO (2020) identified the use of

information and communications technology (ICT) to continue student learning while the

schools were closed and expressed the urgency to “ensure that the youngest learners are not

neglected and receive the stimulation they need to set the foundation for learning in their future”

(p. 1).

          Although promising, not everyone believed that technology was the solution in closing

learning gaps as a result of the pandemic. In a literature review conducted by Jalongo (2021)

about Covid-19 research and resources in ECE, the author noted that while relying on technology

allowed for continuous learning during the pandemic, it may intensify the already existing gap

especially for disadvantaged students- those who belong to high-poverty, low income families,


                                                 15
who belong to subgroups such as ELs or those with disabilities (Bailey, et.al., 2021; Dorn, et.al.,

2021; UNICEF 2020). Therefore, it was critical to consider the educational technology that will

support the implementation of high-quality learning experiences for all students (UNICEF, 2020)

and will help them become productive citizens in the future (NAEYC, 2022; UNICEF, 2017).

       After the pandemic, educational technology has been continuously used in many different

ways. In ECE, teachers and students utilized it as online platform tools for synchronous and

asynchronous learning, as learning management systems or hubs for resources, materials, and

apps, as tools to communicate with parents and families, as assessment portals, as and even as

personalized intervention programs. Due to the special developmental characteristics and needs

of young children, selecting the most appropriate educational technology in ECE can be tricky.

The developments in neuroscience have offered a better understanding of how the young brain

works and how the quality of early learning experiences can either leave a positive, lifelong

impact on children’s growth, development, and success (NAEYC, 2022; UNICEF, 2017) or

cause lifetime adverse effects (NAEYC, 2022; Knudsen et al., 2006). ECE is also linked to a

grander idea of global development. It is associated with sustainable development and future

economic growth (Britto, 2015; Samuelsson & Kaga, 2008) and is believed to contribute around

$163 billion to the US gross domestic product (GDP) (LeMoine, 2020). With investing in high-

quality ECE for children considered being high stakes, there is a need to ensure that the

technology that will be used by young children will support them in reaching their full potential.

A prospective educational technology that supported these objectives is artificial intelligence in

education (AIEd).




                                                16
                     Artificial Intelligence in Early Childhood Education


       Recently, the use of computers and digital devices in the early childhood classrooms has

been taken over by the use of AI. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has enabled machines to act and

think like humans (ISTE, 2020, 0:28; Lindner & Romeike, 2019; Unicef, 2020), something that

was thought to be impossible until the last few decades. AI is seen as a major contributor to

economic growth with the expected total contribution of $15.7 trillion by 2030 (PwC, 2017). In

2025, it is predicted that AI will displace 85 million jobs, but at the same time, add about 12

million AI-related jobs globally (Russo, 2020). Most businesses will have to reskill or upskill

their current employees (Russo, 2020) to ensure that they are equipped to do the work of the

future, today. With the shift in skills in workforce and training, the top universities from around

the world have increased their AI investments over the past few years, offering a 102.9%

undergraduate and 41.7% graduate increase in the number of courses that teach necessary skills

to build or use a practical AI model (Zhang, et al., 2021).


       With the universities acting quickly to support this fourth industrial revolution, most k-12

schools were called to support this movement, hence, many k-12 schools have started using AI

enabled programs to facilitate teaching and learning. Among the top skills needed to thrive in

2025 included analytical thinking, creativity, and flexibility (Russo, 2020), all of which are skills

that AI enabled programs are capable of supporting and honing (ISTE, 2019).


       AI has already made its way into every doorstep of homes, job sites, and schools around

the world. It can be visibly seen in gadgets such as smartphones, smart speakers, and

programmable robots or it could be working invisibly in the background in search engines and

social media search recommendations, in email filters for spam or inbox-worthy messages, or in


                                                 17
the amount of support tutoring software provides students based on their responses. Whether we

see it or not, or whether we like it or not, AI is here and will also be in the future.


AI Capabilities


        Most k-12 students will enter the workforce when AI is deeply rooted in jobs and has

been well-established (Passow, 2019), this means that all students, including those who are in

ECE, have to explore and manipulate AI enabled programs to acquire soft skills associated with

working with them in the future. It is also necessary that in their young age they become fully

aware and begin to understand how these programs work and how they can be used in their

chosen careers in the future. AIEd brings a lot of possibilities and offers capabilities that

promise to provide differentiation and support for all students. In early childhood settings, the AI

capabilities below are the most commonly used.


Data Collection and Management using Educational Data Mining (EDM)


        Part of the most challenging tasks of a teacher, aside from the actual act of teaching,

includes collecting, recording, analyzing, and reporting data. EDMs are programs and

applications that are used to collect, analyze, and track students’ achievement and behavior and

convert them to useful and meaningful information (Luckin, et.al., 2016; Zorić, 2020). This

information is readily available for teachers, administrators, and parents to use. EDM is useful

for early childhood teachers because of its ability to collect uniform data for all students and to

precisely and efficiently analyze them. Some EDM programs like ESGI and DIBELS Next have

the ability to produce detailed reports based on student data that can be used for intervention and

early identification. Reports can also be used to communicate student progress with parents and



                                                  18
other professionals. EDM can also collect and analyze students’ attendance and behavior and

predict possible issues that may occur based on the trends and patterns.


Production of Smart Content


       Many early childhood students and teachers have yet to discover individual students’

learning preferences and needs. In order to provide differentiation and promote a love for

learning, teachers need to provide students with choices on how to access and learn new

information. AI has enabled teachers to customize lessons by producing smart contents through

digital platforms, information visualization, and learning content update (Plitnichenko,

2020). Several digital platforms offer lessons in various formats, complexities, and languages,

customizable visuals to represent the lessons, and automatically updates the information to keep

abreast with the latest, most relevant information. Learning A-Z, NewsELA, and Zearn Math are

some examples of digital platforms that offer smart contents.


Accessibility and Support


       Perhaps one of the best capabilities of AIEd is its accessibility. The Covid-19 pandemic

caused several sectors, including education, to lean on technology tools, specifically the use of

human-like helpers like AI (Zorić, 2020). The need to remotely work and study forced many

school districts to offer synchronous and asynchronous virtual lessons for all students in k-12.

The Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) opted not to require synchronous lessons for

pre-k and younger students for many reasons, including the lack of parental availability to

support students in online learning communities during school hours (J. Board, personal

communication, February 2020). AI has made it possible for parents to conveniently and easily

access lessons, materials, and resources in their children’s grade level that students can do at

                                                 19
their own time and pace. Chatbots and online assistants are also able to support parents and

students in answering questions they may have at any time.


Automated Assessments


       Teachers and students can take advantage of AI’s ability to provide automated

assessments that will immediately grade and provide feedback to both teachers and students.

Google Forms, Mentimeter, and Kahoot are some programs that can be used in the early

childhood classroom that will do this task while adding additional tools for students such as links

to videos or other resources. Some of these programs can even be fun and celebrate student

success by enabling teachers to add special animations or sounds when students get correct

answers.


Personalization and Feedback through Intelligent Tutor System (ITS)


       In ECE, it is important that one-on-one attention is given to students because of their

unique developmental characteristics and learning differences. Unfortunately, in some states like

Louisiana, kindergarten to 2nd grade classrooms in public schools have an average teacher-to-

student ratio of 1:25. This makes it almost impossible for the teacher to provide this one-on-one

attention consistently and on a daily basis. Luckily, AIEd has made it possible for ITS to provide

all students the attention and support they need, whenever they need it. ITS uses “AI techniques

to simulate one-to-one human tutoring, delivering learning activities best matched to a learner’s

cognitive needs and providing targeted and timely feedback, all without an individual teacher

having to be present” (Luckin, et.al., 2016, p. 25).




                                                 20
                                    Amira Learning Software

Benefits and Challenges in Tutoring


       The present study focused on an ITS program, Amira Learning software, and its impact

on young children’s literacy development. Before exploring the impact of intelligent tutors, it is

imperative to understand the significant role of a human tutor to the academic growth of

students. Merriam- Webster defines a tutor as a person in charge with the instruction and

guidance of another. In K-12, learning from a knowledgeable and skilled tutor is an invaluable

tool. It can particularly be beneficial for children who are experiencing academic challenges so

they can build resilience and perseverance. In some cases, tutoring can be what separates

academic achievement from academic failure. Perhaps the most astounding characteristic of

tutoring is the ability of tutors to provide immediate feedback and adjust instruction accordingly

to meet the needs of the individual student. Just like in any capacity, expertise plays a big role in

the success of tutoring. A highly-skilled tutor can influence learners in many positive ways, but

on the other hand, “human tutors who are not experts and yet tutor in academic areas can do

more harm than good” (Graesser, et al., 2012). It is expected that when tutors have the expertise

in the subject they teach, students will yield positive results.


       In a meta-analysis with 96 past sample studies, Nickow, et al.. (2020) confirmed the

outstanding claims that tutoring produced significant positive outcomes for students. In addition

to this, they emphasized that tutoring was more effective when facilitated by teachers and

paraprofessionals as compared to paraprofessionals and parents, which again highlights the point

of a subject-area expert tutor. The authors also expressed that tutoring has a greater effect in

early grades and that customization, the ability to gear instruction based on the students’ level,


                                                  21
may have been the main reasons why tutoring is effective. They also added that the one-on-one

nature of tutoring allows students to be more engaged in the lesson while at the same time

enabling the teacher to provide more feedback. This leads to more opportunities for students to

practice the skills they are learning. Nickow, et al. (2020) also believe that the interactions

between the tutor and the students allow them to develop a healthy, positive relationship which

results in academic success.


       Despite the positive effects of tutoring in K-12, there are a few challenges in this form of

instruction. The first issue can be linked to the cost of the program. While traditional tutoring has

been proven to work, the one-on-one sessions can be very costly compared to small group

instructions. Another hurdle is time management. In a classroom setting with roughly between

20-30 students with varying levels and needs, it can be difficult to find the time to meet with

individual students for tutoring with only one teacher present without sacrificing regular

instruction time. The last but not the least of the concerns will be customization (Bloom,

1984). Planning for actual tutoring instruction for each individual student can also be taxing to

teachers, especially for lower grade teachers who teach all contents.


Intelligent Machine


       The conditions explained above make AI a perfect candidate for a human-like tutor that

will be more cost effective and manageable than employing real teachers. As a result of Covid-

19 pandemic, educators and stakeholders have been exploring ways to help close learning gaps

without over exhausting the human and financial resources the school systems have. AI was

initially explored to serve the role of a tutor in the 1970’s when J. Carbonell introduced

SCHOLAR, an intelligent tutor (Guo, et al.., 2021; Mousavinasab, et al.., 2021). With the known


                                                  22
success rate of one-on-one tutoring, many academic institutions have been working hard to

develop new and polish existing ITS.


       ITS are advanced AIEd tools that resulted from the collaborative efforts of researchers in

the fields of Education, Psychology, and AI (Atun, 2020). ITS are human-like computer

programs or tutors that have the ability and knowledge of the subject they teach (Alkhatlan &

Kalita, 2018). They are designed to facilitate personalized adaptive learning experiences and

unlike conventional educational technology tools, ITS possess a distinct characteristic of being

able to modify their own behavior based on the information they receive from the student and

teacher users, programmed to learn the cognitive patterns of students, and provide individualized

instruction to help them learn specific skills in different subject areas (Atun, 2020; Ma, et al.,

2014). ITS “know what they teach, whom they teach, and how to teach” (Alkhatlan & Kalita,

2018, p.2). What sets ITS apart from other AIEd programs is that these tutors have the ability to

process the students’ learning and provide instant, automated feedback to support learning

(Alkhatlan & Kalita, 2018; Roscoe, et al., 2014) similar to human tutors.


Intelligent Reading Tutor


       As a reading tutor, ITS has proven its positive impact on elementary-aged students.

Wijekumar (2012, 2013, 2018) has been a part of a number of studies on ITS and its impact on

reading comprehension. In 2012, Wijekumar, et al. conducted a randomized controlled trial to

investigate if 4th grade ITS classrooms outperform control classrooms in expository reading

comprehension as measured by standardized and researcher-designed tests. There were a total of

60 rural and 71 suburban classrooms that participated in the study. The experimental conditions

were randomly assigned to the schools. After the teachers have been notified of the assignments,


                                                  23
the ITS classroom teachers were asked to use the program for 30-45 minutes each week as a

substitute for a portion of the regular language arts instruction. Total instruction time for both

ITS and control classrooms were planned to be the same. The teachers who were assigned to ITS

classrooms were given professional development training prior to the beginning of the next

school year. A pretest was administered to all participants and a posttest at the end of the school

year after the experiment.


       Pretests revealed no significant differences in students’ comprehension level, which make

them comparable groups before the experiment. Results of the study suggested that students who

were in the ITS group who used the program for about 30-45 minutes per week over a span of 6

months displayed significantly improved performance, as evidenced by the research-designed

posttest, compared to their counterparts in the control group. On the other hand, a small effect

size with the ITS group was observed on the standardized multiple choice comprehension test

given during the posttest.


       In 2013, Wijekumar, et al.. conducted a multi-site cluster randomized trial to investigate

whether there was a connection between fidelity in using ITS and improvement in reading

comprehension of 4th and 5th grade students. The researchers used both standardized and

researcher designed measures in their study. The experimental and control groups used the same

curriculum, with the exception of one class period each week because of the random ITS and

control classroom assignments. For the ITS classroom, one language arts class was substituted

with the web-based program for 30-45 minutes each week.


       A total of 131 4th grade teachers and 128 5th grade teachers were randomly assigned to

ITS and control groups. The ITS classrooms that were selected in the study after random


                                                 24
assignment were the ones who implemented the ITS software with fidelity. Students were

administered a pretest at the beginning of the academic year and a posttest at the end of the

academic year. Researchers noted that there were no significant differences between the ITS and

control groups on the pretest, which indicated that both classrooms were comparable before the

implementation of the experiment.


       The analysis revealed that the use of ITS with a high level of fidelity, including sufficient

time used, teacher monitoring, and teacher engagement in 4th and 5th grade classrooms resulted

in moderate to large effects on the researcher-developed measures. On the standardized test, the

effect sizes were small, but still notable considering the nature of the multiple choice format of

the reading comprehension test. The effect sizes were particularly impressive for 4th grade

students.


       In a similar study from 2012, Wijekumar, et al. (2018) conducted a large scale

randomized controlled trial to examine the impacts of a web-based instruction structure on the

reading comprehension of struggling fourth and fifth grade readers. The researchers used

standardized and researcher designed tests. A total of 45 schools, consisting of 22 rural and 23

urban schools, volunteered to participate in the study. There were a total of 725 fourth grade

students and 717 fifth grade students from both school settings. The students were administered a

pretest at the beginning of the school year and a posttest at the end of the school year. Students

who scored at the lowest 25% percentile on reading comprehension pretest were chosen to

participate in the study.


       The regular instruction was based on the structure strategy, an instructional approach that

was text structure-based for improving reading comprehension in the content area. The ITS


                                                 25
modeled how to identify signaling words, classify text structure, write a main idea, construct a

recall of text, generate inferences, and monitor comprehension using an AI agent, I.T. Both the

ITS and the control classrooms had an equivalent amount of language arts instructional time,

averaging 450 minutes per week or around 90 minutes per day. In the ITS classrooms, the

students received 30-45 minutes of language arts instruction each week using the software,

replacing traditional teacher instruction.


        The findings in the study of Wijekumar, et al. (2018) indicated that the implementation of

the web-based ITS for teaching structure strategy has demonstrated a positive impact and holds

potential for further improving instruction for students who struggle with reading

comprehension.


        The studies presented above investigated the effectiveness of ITS in reading

comprehension of upper elementary grades. Although the results were significant and

instrumental in the present study, the positive outcomes of ITS in these levels cannot be used to

generalize and suggest positive impacts on foundational literacy skills, which the present study

investigated. Searches on academic databases for studies on the impact of ITS on foundational

literacy skills did not yield a wide range of results, but Amira Learning software’s webpage

(https://www.amiralearning.com/research.html) listed titles of articles and field trials published

and funded by the company, in conjunction with Amira Learning software, or were about Project

LISTEN, which where Amira Learning software reportedly originated from. Some of these

studies were used as references in the present study but were purposely not presented in the

literature review for fairness.




                                                26
Amira the Intelligent Tutor


       Amira Learning software claims to be the world's first intelligent reading assistant that

offers personalized tutoring to help students improve their reading fluency. Amira, an animated

young lady, interacts with the students by initiating conversations, asking questions, and

providing feedback while students are reading. Amira has the ability to filter discussions and is

programmed to respond and talk only about the story students are reading

(www.amiralearning.com, n.d.).


       Amira Learning software's technology has its roots in research spanning two decades

under the sponsorships of Carnegie Mellon University's (CMU) Project LISTEN (Literacy

Innovation that Speech Technology ENables). Originally known as "RoboTutor '' during its

tenure within Project LISTEN, this software underwent rigorous development and refinement

after being licensed from CMU. The objective was to make sure that students, educators, and

families could access and utilize this extensively researched and evidence-based platform on a

large scale (Meta-Analysis of Research on Amira Intelligent Tutoring’s Impact, 2022).


       Project LISTEN is a research initiative developed by CMU. The primary focus of Project

LISTEN is to improve literacy skills, especially reading, using speech technology. An overview

of the technology typically used in Project LISTEN included (https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~listen/):


       Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR). ASR technology is used to convert spoken

language into written text. In the context of Project LISTEN, ASR is employed to transcribe and

analyze students' spoken responses to reading exercises.




                                                27
       Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS). Project LISTEN often utilizes intelligent tutoring

systems to provide personalized instruction to students. These systems adapt to individual

learners and provide feedback and guidance based on their performance.


       Speech Processing Algorithms. Various speech processing algorithms are used to

analyze students' pronunciation, fluency, and comprehension while reading. These algorithms

can help identify areas where students may need improvement. Project LISTEN converts speech

input (Sphinx) to usable data.


       Machine Learning and Data Analytics. Project LISTEN employs machine learning and

data analytics to assess and track student progress, identify learning patterns, and adapt

instruction accordingly.


       Educational Data Mining. The technology in Project LISTEN includes interactive

educational software and applications designed to engage students in reading activities and

provide a dynamic learning experience. It uses data to learn about students and instruction to

predict students’ behavior, assess their needs, and evaluate the intelligent tutor’s teaching.


Amira Learning Platform


       Amira claims to offer support to both students and teachers. When students log in to the

portal, Amira, the animated tutor, provides them with a variety of books to choose from. She

then activates her AI technology to listen to students read. Amira begins conversations with the

students and takes notes of reading patterns and their responses to help identify reading skills

gap. Amira uses AI-powered, perfectly-timed micro-interventions aligned with SOR to support

foundational reading skills (phonics, phonemic awareness, decoding, and vocabulary) and later


                                                 28
on, comprehension, to provide tutoring to the students. As students progress with their tutoring

sessions, Amira celebrates the completion and presents their reading data (average speed and

average correct) to show their reading progress.


       To support teachers, after students’ reading sessions, updated, detailed reports which

track student progress and identify struggles while students are reading are readily available for

analysis. Aside from the reports, Amira Learning software also offers the teachers access to

instructional links, resources, and activities that they can use when students are not practicing

with the software.


The Science of Reading


Louisiana Literacy Initiatives


       During its 2021 Regular Session, the Louisiana Senate approved Act no. 108. This new

law mandated early literacy training for all subject area K-3 teachers, as well as principals and

assistant principals who serve students in these grade levels. The training focused on SOR, an

extensive and interdisciplinary collection of scientifically-grounded research on literacy

instruction (Moats, 1999; Moats 2020; Science of Reading: Defining Guide, 2022). It has been

an area of study for several decades now, but its implications on education have been questioned

and a subject of debate (Petscher, et al.., 2021; Seidenberg, 2013; Shanahan, 2020). It was not

until the late 1990’s when SOR began to gain popularity and recognition in the field of education

and literacy instruction. During this time, there was a growing emphasis on evidence-based

practices and scientific research in understanding the processes involved in reading development.

Additionally, there was an emphasis on the importance of effective reading instruction to match

the knowledge of reading (Shanahan, 2020; Moats 2020).

                                                 29
       Back in 1999, Moats stressed that even with the scientific knowledge of how the brain

works when one reads and despite Scientists’ claim that 95% of children can learn how to read,

“statistics reveal an alarming prevalence of struggling and poor readers that is not limited to

anyone segment of society” (p. 7).


       With the promising research but insignificant outcomes, SOR must not only provide

information to educators and stakeholders, instead, it should support in identifying the most

effective methods to expand literacy opportunities, enhance literacy achievement levels, promote

equitable access, and improve efficiency and effectiveness of reading instruction (Shanahan,

2020). This should include focusing on teacher preparation programs and professional

development for teachers to provide them with a more rigorous and closely aligned guidance to

instructing through SOR (Moats, 2020).


       It was not until after more than a decade when the first state in the US embarked on SOR.

Mississippi was the first state to support literacy initiatives aligned with SOR in 2013. The state

mandated that school systems provide teachers with training in evidence-based reading

instruction and intervention while obtaining support from school-based reading interventions.

Students with reading difficulties received individualized reading plans and retention policy and

support for third grade students who were retained were enforced. The US Department of

Education, National Assessment of Education (NAEP) report showed that Mississippi went from

the second lowest ranked state in reading scores for low-income 4th grade students in 2013 to the

21st state in the rankings (Lurye, 2023). This significant improvement has gradually influenced

other states to adopt SOR, but in 2021, year after the Covid-19 school year, there was a

significant increase in the number of states in a year (11 states) that got on board with SOR. This

included the state of Louisiana. At present, there are a total of 31 states together with the District

                                                  30
of Columbia, that have mandated laws or introduced new policies regarding evidence-based

reading instruction (Schwartz, 2022).


       As established earlier in the present study, the impact of Covid-19 on education extends

beyond the physical and mental health risks faced by teachers and students. It has also resulted in

learning loss and gaps that have adversely affected students’ academic progress, specifically

growth in math and literacy. Mastery in both math and literacy can be considered as essential

components for students to succeed in various aspects of life. However, literacy skills, including

reading, writing, and comprehension, are crucial for effective communication, critical thinking,

and accessing information across various subjects. Literacy is fundamental for academic success,

as it forms the basis for learning and understanding other subjects beyond just language arts

(Moats, 1999; Moats 2020). Therefore, anything that negatively affects literacy development is

never good news for any state in the nation, but its effects are most daunting on the states like

Louisiana which have been at the bottom of the national literacy ranking list for decades

(Chavez, 2021). Thus, it was a turning point for many educators when Louisiana decided to be

on board with training K-3rd grade teachers and administrators with SOR.


                           Theoretical Framework: Amira Learning


       The present study aimed to investigate the effects of an AI program, Amira Learning, on

literacy development in early childhood education. To fully explore this topic, it was essential to

consider two overarching concepts: mastery learning (Bloom, 1975) and skilled reader (Gough &

Tunmer, 1986; Scarborough, 2001; National Reading Panel, 2000).




                                                 31
Theory of Mastery of Learning


       The theory of mastery learning in ITS stemmed from the work of educational

psychologist Bloom, who developed the concept of mastery learning in the 1960s. Mastery

learning emphasized that all learners can achieve mastery of a subject if provided with

appropriate instructional strategies, feedback, and time for learning (Guskey, 2005). Bloom's

(1968) theory of mastery learning presumed that students should attain a specified level of

mastery on prerequisite knowledge or skills before moving on to more advanced material. This

approach contrasted with traditional instructional models that relied on fixed time periods for

learning. Mastery learning promoted individualized instruction and allowed learners to progress

at their own pace, ensuring a solid foundation before advancing to higher-level concepts.


       In the context of ITS, mastery learning theory influenced the design and implementation

of instructional sequences, assessment strategies, and feedback mechanisms. ITS based on

mastery learning provided learners with tailored instruction and practice opportunities,

continually assessing their understanding and providing personalized feedback to address

knowledge gaps or misconceptions. These systems monitor learner progress, identify areas of

weakness, and offer remediation or additional learning resources to support mastery.


       Mastery learning was built upon several fundamental principles that align with the

pedagogical principles of ITS. These principles included the following (Abdelsalam, 2014):


           ●   Time is a crucial factor in the learning process. Teachers should allocate sufficient

               time for each learner, recognizing their varying levels of achievement.




                                                32
           ●   The quality of teaching significantly influences learning outcomes. If teaching

               quality is low, learners may require more time to grasp the material effectively.

           ●   Motivation and the learners' ability to comprehend are essential foundations for

               successful learning. Tasks are accomplished by considering these basics.

           ●   Learners progress at different rates based on their individual capabilities and

               characteristics.

           ●   Immediate feedback assists learners in identifying and rectifying their mistakes

               promptly.

           ●   Alignment of the learning objectives with the breakdown of topics and tasks to

               help in learning the materials.

           ●   Continuous assessment is crucial for attaining the objectives of mastery learning.

               Diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments are employed to ensure

               ongoing evaluation.


       The present study delved into the alignment between Amira Learning software’s

instructional design and three of the principles of the mastery of learning. These principles

served as a guide when assessing the effectiveness of Amira Learning software in facilitating

mastery-oriented learning experiences and improving students’ literacy outcomes. The three

principles that were used were 1) Learning time and achievement: Bloom's theory recognized the

variability in learners' pace of learning and the importance of allowing sufficient time for

mastery. The present study investigated the relationship between the time spent using Amira

Learning software and learners' achievement levels. 2) Immediate feedback: Bloom's theory

highlighted the importance of continuously assessing students’ learning to monitor their progress

and provide timely feedback. The present study explored the effectiveness of the feedback

                                                 33
provided by Amira Learning software in guiding learners towards mastery and facilitating their

learning progress. 3) Alignment of learning objectives with the topics and tasks: Bloom’s theory

emphasized the importance of clearly defined learning objectives. The present study explored

how teachers rate Amira Learning software’s feedback and lessons as they align with SOR and

its objectives.


The Skilled Reader


        The Simple View of Reading (SVR), Scarborough's Reading Rope, and the Five Pillars

of Reading are three frameworks that provide a comprehensive understanding of the various

components involved in the process of reading. While they have distinct characteristics, they all

recognize that reading is a complex process that involves two fundamental practices, decoding

and comprehension. They also recognize that reading skills develop hierarchically, with

foundational skills serving as building blocks for more advanced ones.


Simple View of Reading


        SOR instruction supports the delivery of explicit, systematic literacy lessons to students

followed by multiple opportunities to practice reading and obtain feedback from the teacher

(Shanahan, 2020; Moats, 2020, Petscher, et al.., 2021; Science of Reading: Defining Guide,

2022). While SOR is not attached to a single ideology or philosophy or program of instruction

(Science of Reading Defining Guide, 2022), there are two theoretical models that have been used

in professional developments about SOR to explain the complexity of reading, the Simple View

of Reading (SVR) and Scarborough’s Reading Rope.




                                                 34
       Gough & Tunmer (1986) developed and proposed SVR. SVR is a theoretical model that

explains reading comprehension by breaking it down into two components: decoding and

language comprehension. SVR suggested that reading comprehension is a product of the

interaction between these two essential factors (Decoding x Language Comprehension= Reading

Comprehension). In this model, both decoding and language comprehension are considered

critical for reading success. A reader must possess adequate decoding skills to accurately read

words, and at the same time, they need strong language comprehension abilities to understand

and make meaning from the text.


       Decoding refers to the ability to convert written or printed words into spoken words. It

involves recognizing and understanding the individual sounds (phonemes) that make up words

and blending them to form meaningful units, such as syllables or words. Decoding skills are

primarily associated with phonics instruction, which teaches the relationship between letters and

their sound correspondence. Decoding involves phonological awareness, decoding, sight word

reading, and fluency.


       Language comprehension encompasses the broader understanding of spoken or written

language, including vocabulary knowledge, syntax (grammar), semantics (word meanings), and

background knowledge. It involves making sense of the words, sentences, and ideas encountered

while reading. Language comprehension incorporates background knowledge, syntax,

vocabulary, and text structure


Scarborough’s Reading Rope


       Scarborough (2001) offered a more thorough representation of the skilled reader through

the Reading Rope Model or Scarborough's Reading Rope. The present study referred to it using

                                                35
the latter. In Scarborough's Reading Rope, the two essential components of reading

comprehension have been broken down into individual strands that are interwoven to represent

the strong bond that needs to be present in order for students to become skilled readers. This

model presented a view of reading comprehension which includes various sub-skills within word

recognition (phonological awareness, phonics, fluency) and language comprehension

(vocabulary, background knowledge, verbal reasoning, literacy knowledge).


       Scarborough’s Reading Rope emphasized the reciprocal relationship between word

recognition and language comprehension, with both strands intertwined and mutually supportive.

It has helped inform instructional practices for phonological awareness, phonics, fluency,

vocabulary development, background knowledge, and comprehension strategies.


       Figure 1. The Scarborough's Reading Rope




The Five Pillars of Reading


       Another theoretical framework that has been linked to SOR is the concept of the Five

Pillars of Reading. This was originally based on research by the National Reading Panel ([NRP]

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD], 2000), a group of highly-

qualified scholars bringing together their expertise in the field of science-based research reading

and instruction which started in 1997. In NRP NICHD’s final report published in 2000, they



                                                36
identified the five essential components of reading instruction, phonemic awareness, phonics,

fluency (also oral reading fluency), vocabulary, and comprehension (Shanahan, 2005).


       Shanahan (2005) summarized and explained each component of effective reading

instruction below.


       Phonemic awareness. Phonemic awareness is the ability to identify, manipulate, and

work with individual phonemes, which are the smallest units of sound in spoken language. It is a

critical precursor to reading and is considered one of the foundational skills for literacy

development. Phonemic awareness goes beyond simply recognizing individual letters or sounds.

It involves understanding that words are made up of individual phonemes and being able to

manipulate and blend them to form words. Phonemic awareness tasks do not involve printed

text; they are focused solely on oral language.


       Phonics. Phonics is a method of teaching and learning reading that focuses on the

relationship between letters (graphemes) and sounds (phonemes). It involves teaching children to

understand and use the systematic connections between written letters and the sounds they

represent. In phonics instruction, children learn to associate individual or groups of letters with

specific sounds. They learn the phonetic rules and patterns that govern the English language,

such as letter-sound correspondences, syllable division, and spelling patterns. Phonics instruction

typically starts with simple letter-sound relationships and progresses to more complex ones.


       Oral Reading Fluency. Oral reading fluency refers to the ability to read aloud with

accuracy, speed, and expression. It involves the smooth and fluent delivery of text, where the

reader demonstrates proficiency in decoding words, maintaining an appropriate pace, and using

expressive intonation and phrasing. Oral reading fluency is typically assessed by having students

                                                  37
read a passage aloud while being timed. The assessment measures factors such as reading words

correct per minute (WCPM), accuracy, and prosody (expression, phrasing, and intonation). The

goal is to determine how well a reader can read aloud with both accuracy and fluency.


       Vocabulary. In this context, vocabulary pertains to the meanings of words, and

vocabulary instruction involves teaching those meanings. However, it is worth noting that

reading instruction often concentrates heavily on various aspects of words, such as recognizing

them, sight words, strategies for approaching unfamiliar words, word structure, and organizing

words based on shared characteristics. As a result, the term "vocabulary" is sometimes used

interchangeably to refer to both word recognition and word meaning.


       Reading Comprehension. Reading comprehension involves the process of

comprehending and interpreting the information presented in a text. Rather than passively

remembering information, comprehension focuses on actively constructing meaning. It requires

active and dynamic thinking, including interpreting information based on one's own knowledge

and beliefs, using the text's organizational structure to analyze information (or applying one's

own structure to the ideas), making inferences beyond explicit statements by the author, and

engaging in various cognitive processes. Effective comprehension depends on the engaged

interaction between the reader and the text, where the reader actively processes and interacts

with the information presented.


       Using these three literacy concepts as a theoretical framework, the present study analyzed

the impact of Amira Learning software on literacy development of first grade students. Oral

Reading Fluency (ORF) is an important component of reading as it allows students to practice

fluency and develop vocabulary and comprehension.


                                                38
                                            Summary


       The impact of Covid-19 affected everyone around the world, disrupting all aspects of life.

In the field of education, it has widened pre-existing learning gaps and has created new

challenges (Sabates, et al.., 2021; Hoofman & Secord, 2021; Van Lancker & Parolin, 2020),

including providing individualized instruction to meet students’ new needs. Fortunately, AIEd

has the ability to think and function like a human (McCarthy, 2007) as an intelligent tutor and

provide personalized instruction geared to the individual needs of students (Atun, 2020; Ma, et

al.., 2014). In states like Louisiana where reading proficiency has traditionally been low (Sentell,

2022), reliance on SOR, a research-based scientific knowledge in teaching students how to read,

has been necessary. This present study investigated the impact of Amira Learning software, one

of the pioneering intelligent tutors aligned with SOR, to young students’ literacy development.

        The second chapter of this research presented an extensive review of relevant literature

about intelligent tutors and their influence on literacy development. In Chapter Three, various

components of the study are introduced such as the research paradigm, setting and context,

ethical considerations, data sources, data analysis, and research design.




                                                 39
                        CHAPTER THREE. METHODOLOGY


       The present study aimed to investigate the effects of an AI program, Amira Learning, on

literacy development in early childhood education. Amira Learning software is a web-supported

Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) designed to

improve oral reading fluency of early learners. With the rapid development of AI technologies

and a continuously growing interest in their application in educational contexts, there has been

significant growth in the scientific literature in relation to the application of AIEd (Broda &

Frank, 2015; Ma, et al. 2014; Mousavinasab, et al., 2021; Nickow, et al., 2020,; Su, et. al 2022;

Touretzky, et al., 2019; Yang, 2022). The threats on human capital caused by Covid-19 has also

increased research interest in AI as intelligent tutors. To make informed decisions about the

research methods to be used in the present study, previous studies were examined. Quantitative

research involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to answer research questions.

This method provided a systematic and objective way to gather and analyze data, as it allowed

for the use of statistical analysis to draw conclusions (Eyisi, 2016; Queiros, et al.., 2017).


       A quantitative methodology was used to answer the research questions, with the focus on

whether an AI application was effective in improving oral reading fluency in early learners. As

planned, the present study focused on following a statistical approach to ensure fairness, validity,

and reliability of the data analysis. The research paradigm outlined below provided the

theoretical foundation for the study and shaped its direction and goals. The research design

constituted a comprehensive plan that systematically addressed the research question. This

design served as an overarching framework that guided the selection of appropriate data

collection and analysis methods (Spatz, 2019). The research design also outlined the general


                                                  40
approach that was employed in answering the research questions which provided a roadmap for a

quantitative investigation. By adhering to a well-articulated research design, it was hoped that

the present study ensured the rigor and coherence of the data collection and analysis processes,

which led to meaningful conclusions. The data collection section included methods that will be

used to retrieve the necessary information to conduct the research (Spatz, 2019). The statistical

section explicitly explained the tests that were used to determine the statistical approach that

most effectively answered the research questions. The statistical tests that were chosen for the

present study were based on the type of data being analyzed and the research questions being

asked. The statistical tests helped the study determine the statistical methods that were deemed to

provide the most accurate and meaningful results, allowing it to draw valid conclusions about the

differences in the data. The careful selection of the appropriate statistical tests helped to produce

accurate and reliable results that were useful in answering the research questions and ensured

that the findings were as accurate and reliable as possible (Spatz, 2019).


Research Paradigm


       The present study used quantitative research methods to examine the effectiveness of the

Amira Learning software among first grade students within a suburban school district in

Louisiana. As an intelligent tutor, Amira has been designed to provide students with feedback to

improve their oral reading fluency (ORF). ORF has been identified as one of the literacy

measures that predict literacy success (Shanahan, 2020; Moats, 2020, Petscher, et al.., 2021;

Science of Reading: Defining Guide, 2022). The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy

Skills Next edition (DIBELS Next) has measured ORF beginning in first grade. In the present

study, DIBELS Next was used to assess and compare the students’ progress before and after the

use of the Amira Learning software tutoring software for six weeks.

                                                 41
       Because the present study aimed to focus on establishing a specific relationship between

two measurable variables (time spent using Amira Learning software and ORF achievement

levels), a positivist approach was valuable. Positivism emphasized the use of quantitative

methods to gather data and establish causal relationships. The hope was that the findings of the

study will be useful and applied in other similar situations to impact research in literacy

education. The positivist paradigm enabled researchers to observe occurrences within the

particular phenomenon they have studied and draw conclusions about what can be expected in

similar cases (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017).


       While there was available research on the effectiveness of AIEd learning applications

(Chen et al.,2020; Dong et al., 2022), there was limited information about the Amira Learning

software (Loble & Hawcroft, 2022), with the exception of a few research conducted by Amira

Learning software in conjunction with other educational organizations. The present study wished

to contribute to the body of research that explored the effects of the ITS in improving literacy

development in early childhood education (ECE).


Research Questions


       The research questions that were investigated in the present study were:


       RQ1: What is the relationship between the time spent using Amira Learning software and

learners' oral reading fluency achievement levels?


       RQ2: How effective is the feedback provided by Amira Learning software in improving

students’ oral reading fluency?




                                                 42
          RQ3: What is the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning

software’s alignment to the Science of Reading and its effectiveness in fulfilling the Science of

Reading objectives?

Setting and Context

Setting

          The present study investigated the literacy development of first grade students who used

Amira Learning software for six weeks. The data that was used for the present study was

obtained from one of the suburban elementary schools in Louisiana serving students from Pre-K

3 to 5th grade. Students at the school had access to high-speed internet as well as 1:1 technology

device (Chromebook) from kindergarten to 5th grade. The school was the first in the district to

use Amira Learning software and pilot-tested the program for all students in K-5th grade during

the 2022-2023 school year. During the same school year, the state of Louisiana piloted the

program to support English Learners (ELs) and currently had sixteen districts using Amira

Learning software for their EL population (www.amiralearning.com).

Population

          During the 2022-2023 school year, the school site had a total population of 598 students,

with 52% considered economically disadvantaged who received free or reduced lunch. The

school was comprised of 54.8% white students, 32.6% black, 11% Hispanic, and 1.6% Asian/

Pacific Islander. For two consecutive years, the school has had the highest EL population in the

district. The teacher-to-student ratio in K-5th grade classes ranged from 1:18 to 1:25. The ratios

of the five first grade classes that were used in the present study were 1:17, 1:19, 1:21, 1:21, and

1:22.


                                                  43
Participants

       The data that was used for the present study was obtained from five classes in the first-

grade level. Although data for first grade students was used, the students were not directly

involved in the study. The present study used data collected on the DIBELS Next and Amira

Learning software platforms. The researcher of the present study adhered to ethical guidelines

for using secondary data and identified the original data sources (see Ethical Considerations,

below).

       There were a total of 101 students in first grade at the school site, but data was analyzed

only from 79 students. Data from 21 students were excluded if they fell under one or more of the

following categories: did not take the DIBELS Next ORF pretest or posttest, was not present, at

school, or in class for a total of 5 or more instructional days (equal to 1 week of Amira Learning

software usage) during the six-week pilot testing period for Amira Learning software, or had an

average Amira Learning software usage of 0 minutes in 6 weeks.

       To answer research question 3, purposive and convenience sampling were used to

identify the teacher participants. The researcher of the present study chose participants who,

because of their background and expertise, were believed to have valuable input on the topic.

Teachers at the school site were included if they were certified in early childhood or elementary

education (grades pre-kindergarten to 3rd grade), had experience in the early childhood classroom

(grades pre-kindergarten to 3rd grade), had experience using Amira Learning software, and had

the training in the Science of Reading (SOR) and Amira Learning software. Under these

conditions, 17 teachers at the school site were included to answer the two-question online survey.




                                                44
Ethical Considerations

       The researcher of the present study applied for an approval to conduct the study from the

Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Louisiana State University (LSU) before conducting the

research. An IRB exemption application was granted for the present study after IRB determined

that the study posed little to no risk to human subjects.

       Even with using secondary data from two online platforms, DIBELS Next and Amira

Learning software, the researcher of the present study ensured that safety and security measures

were observed throughout the process. A signed consent form was sent to the district

superintendent of schools, data administrator, and school administrator. The consent forms

described the process of the research, including its purpose, risks, benefits, and their right to

withdraw at any time without consequences. The same was done for the teacher participants. The

anonymity and confidentiality of data and participants were also discussed. After the consent was

signed by the district and school administrators, the data was provided to the researcher of the

present study.

       No identifying information was used in the study and data security was ensured to protect

it from unauthorized access, loss, or disclosure. The data was saved in a password protected

electronic device and online information was obtained and stored in a secured online data

management system. It was known to the teacher participants that the researcher of the present

study was the person who reached out to Amira Learning to pilot-test the software. The

researcher of the present study completed the SOR and Amira Learning software training prior to

teachers’ completion. The participants were informed that the researcher of the present study did

not receive any benefits from the company at any time during the pilot testing and while



                                                  45
conducting the present study. In using the secondary data, appropriate credit to the original data

collectors or sources in any research outputs or publications were cited as needed.

Amira Learning Software


        Amira Learning software claims to offer support to both students and teachers. When

students log in to the portal, Amira, the animated tutor, provides them with a variety of books to

choose from. She then activates her AI technology to listen to students read. Amira begins

conversations with the students and takes notes of reading patterns and their responses to help

identify reading skills gaps. Amira uses AI-powered, perfectly-timed micro-interventions aligned

with SOR to support foundational reading skills (phonics, phonemic awareness, decoding, and

vocabulary) and later on, comprehension, to provide tutoring to the students. As students

progress with their tutoring sessions, Amira celebrates the completion and presents their reading

data (average speed and average correct) to show their reading progress.


        To support teachers, after students’ reading sessions, updated, detailed reports which

track student progress and identify struggles while students are reading were readily available for

analysis. Aside from the reports, Amira Learning software also offers the teachers access to

instructional links, resources, and activities that they can use when students are not practicing

with the intelligent tutor.

Tools

        The present study investigated the use of Amira Learning software

(www.amiralearning.com) on student reading skills as measured by DIBELS Next ORF measure

(www. acadiencelearning.com).



                                                 46
Dynamic Indicator of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Next edition

       DIBELS Next assessments are a set of research-based procedures and measures used to

evaluate students’ acquisition of early literacy skills. They are designed to be short fluency

measures used to regularly monitor the development of early literacy skills and early reading

skills (www. acadiencelearning.org, n.d.). In first grade, DIBELS Next assess the measures of

phoneme segmentation, nonsense word fluency, and oral reading fluency. It uses four levels of

risk to categorize students' performance on the assessment. These risk levels help educators

identify students who may need additional support or intervention in developing their early

literacy skills. The risk levels are typically classified as follows: low risk (green and blue;

students who are performing at or above grade level), some risk (yellow; students who are

performing slightly below grade level), and at risk (red; students who are performing

significantly below grade level).

       Oral Reading Fluency (ORF). ORF as measured by DIBELS Next refers to a specific

assessment used to evaluate a student's reading proficiency. In the DIBELS ORF assessment, a

student is asked to read a grade-level passage aloud for one minute. The evaluator records the

number of words the student reads correctly within that time frame. It focuses on accuracy and

rate of reading.

Procedures

       The present study used a quasi-experimental design and did not alter any grouping,

testing, data collection, and Amira Learning software usage protocols. The school site strictly

followed the DIBELS Next (www. acadiencelearning.org, n.d.) testing protocols and had

expectations in place for these processes. Student testing and collection of data for DIBELS Next


                                                  47
ORF pretest and posttest followed standardized procedures that included scripts for teachers to

use to give the timed test for all literacy measures. This ensured that each student was given the

same directions, equal amount of time to complete the tasks, exact materials, similar conducive

environment, and consistent score reporting. The test was administered by DIBELS Next trained,

certified teachers. Teachers were not allowed to test their own students.

       At the school site, the researcher of the present study was responsible for disseminating

information to teachers and administrators about Amira Learning software. To ensure that

teachers and students get equal opportunities in using the software and that they receive a

uniform message about the usage, limitations, and benefits of the program, a 30-minute training

was conducted by the researcher of the present study to communicate the program expectations

set by the school administrator. The school expectations for usage included allowing students to

use Amira Learning software for at least 30 minutes per week for six weeks. The teachers were

expected to allot 15-20 minutes each day during their small group English Language Arts (ELA)

block for students to use Amira Learning software.

       After discussing the usage expectations for the school site, the teachers were given an

overview of Amira Learning software using presentation slides shared by the representative from

the company. The slides covered topics such as how Amira Learning software works, what the

student experiences look like, what reports can be generated from the platform, and how to

troubleshoot common issues about the use of the program.

       A follow-up online training sponsored by Amira Learning University, the company’s

professional development platform (www.amiralearning.com), was completed by every teacher

who was asked to use the program. The follow-up teacher training took about 30 minutes to

complete. Topics covered included usage logistics, sample videos of students interacting with

                                                48
Amira, information on the program’s alignment with the Science of Reading (SOR), and

additional training courses available for teachers and leaders. Teachers started using Amira

Learning software the following week after the teacher training was completed.

Data Sources

       Aligned with quasi-experimental uncontrolled before and after research methods, the

effects of Amira Learning software on the literacy development of first grade students were

explored without a control group for comparison (Grimshaw, et al., 2000). The following data

sources were used in the present study.

       First data source. DIBELS Next Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) pretest and posttest were

administered to all first-grade students by certified teachers who were members of the school

level DIBELS Next team. The data was collected before and after the six-week Amira Learning

software usage. Student data were entered to the DIBELS Next portal where pre-generated score

reports were downloadable. The reports included all measures of DIBELS Next assessment that

were administered to students. The researcher of the present study was provided with the

DIBELS Next report by the school district data administrator.

       Second data source. The second data source that was used was the total amount of time

students used Amira Learning software in minutes. The total amount of time spent in the

software was calculated by adding the amount of time students spent reading books and the

amount of time students interacted with Amira the avatar during tutoring and feedback sessions .




                                                49
This data was collected by and stored on the Amira Learning software platform. The researcher

of the present study was provided a copy of the report by the school district data administrator.

       Third data source. After the six-week period of using Amira Learning software, the

teacher participants were asked to answer these questions: “How would you rate the

effectiveness of Amira Learning software in accomplishing the goals of the Science of

Reading?” and “How aligned is Amira Learning software with the Science of Reading?”.

Teachers were provided with an online link to the survey to share their insights.

Data Analysis

       In this section, the statistical methods employed to investigate the research questions and

hypotheses in this study were outlined. The present study focused on the effectiveness of Amira

Learning software usage and feedback in improving students' oral reading fluency and its

alignment with the SOR framework. Descriptive statistics were initiated to gain a comprehensive

understanding of the central tendencies of the study variables, which provided an initial insight

into the data's characteristics. Subsequently, an assessment of the normality of the data

distribution was conducted through histogram visualizations and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.

These assessments indicated that the study variables did not adhere to a normal distribution,

leading to the selection of the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, a non-parametric statistical test that is

better suited to analyze the change in oral reading fluency scores from pretest to posttest.

       For research question one, the goal was not only to assess the relationship between

DIBELS Next ORF pre and post test scores (dependent variable) and Amira Learning software

usage in minutes (independent variable) but to also predict and model the oral reading fluency

achievement levels based on the time spent using Amira Learning software. To explore the


                                                 50
relationship between Amira Learning software usage and learners' oral reading fluency, a simple

regression analysis was conducted. This enabled the ascertainment of the extent to which Amira

Learning software usage was associated with improvements in oral reading fluency. The

regression analysis provided insights into how the time spent on the platform affected the oral

reading fluency scores, considering other potential factors that might be influencing fluency.

Regression analysis allowed the researcher of the present study to estimate the strength and

direction of the relationship, identify any significant predictors, and generate a regression

equation that was used for predictions (Hinkle, et al., 2003).

         To address the second research question regarding the effectiveness of Amira Learning

software's feedback in enhancing oral reading fluency, new variables representing the difference

between pretest and posttest oral reading fluency scores were derived. This allowed the

quantification of the degree of improvement in oral reading fluency over the study duration. The

paired t-test was initially chosen as a statistical method in the present study to compare the

means of two paired measurements taken from the same individual. Two statistical analyses,

linear and multiple linear regressions, were conducted to ensure validity of the results of the

study.

         For research question 3, teachers' insights on the alignment and effectiveness of Amira

Learning software with the SOR framework were examined through chi-square goodness-of-fit

analyses. These analyses provided valuable insights into teachers' perceptions regarding Amira

Learning software. Pie charts were used to show how teachers responded to the two questions.

         All statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0.0.0. This program has been believed to facilitate a thorough

examination of the research questions and enabled a robust and systematic analysis of the

                                                 51
collected data. The SPSS software has been a widely used statistical analysis tool in the social

sciences and has offered a comprehensive suite of techniques for analyzing and visualizing data.

The utilization of this software in the present study ensured a rigorous and systematic

examination of the data, thereby contributing to the robustness and credibility of the findings. A

predetermined significance level of 0.05 was used in the present study. The chosen analytical

approaches were carefully selected to ensure the validity of the findings and to effectively

address the specific research questions.

Research Design

       The present study used a quasi-experimental quantitative research design to explore the

research questions. Quantitative designs are fixed and deductive, with variables and hypotheses

designed prior to data collection. For research questions one and two, quasi-experimental design

was used; specifically, an uncontrolled quasi-experimental before and after design to measure the

improvement in oral fluency due to time spent within Amira Learning software, and Amira

Learning software feedback. The present study did not alter any protocols at the school site to

obtain data for the study. Instead, secondary data from the school was used and analyzed. After

receiving an exemption for the study from the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the researcher

of the present study obtained permission from school and district level administrators to use their

previously collected DIBELS Next and Amira Learning software data. The data used in the

present study were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version

29.0.0.0.

       For research question 1, the impact of Amira Learning software usage on students’ ORF

scores, the student data that was used were collected immediately before, and immediately after

the use of the Amira Learning software using DIBELS Next ORF measure. Tests of assumptions

                                                52
were performed to ensure the validity and reliability of the regression model and its results.

Regression analysis made several assumptions about the data and the relationships between

variables. By testing these assumptions, the researcher was able to assess whether the model was

appropriate for the data and whether the results can be trusted (Hinkle, et al., 2003). Any

observed differences in performance were assumed to be due to the Amira Learning software

usage and tutoring. It was hypothesized that, assuming there was a moderate to high positive

relationship between ORF scores and Amira Learning software usage, high usage of Amira

Learning software will result in high posttest ORF scores.

       For research question 2, the effects of Amira Learning software's feedback on students'

reading skills, data used was also collected from DIBELS Next ORF and Amira Learning

software platforms. The degree of correlation between ORF score and Amira Learning software

feedback in minutes was originally planned to be analyzed using paired t-tests on SPSS 29.0.0.0.

Tests of assumptions were performed using the program. Similar to regression analysis,

conducting assumption checks are also important when performing a paired t-test. A paired t-test

is a statistical test used to compare the means of two related groups or conditions, often before

and after an intervention or treatment (Hinkle, et al., 2003), and in this case, after receiving

feedback from Amira Learning software. Because the assumptions for normality for this data

were not met, an alternative non-parametric test, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was considered

and the data was analyzed using linear regression.

       For research question 3, Amira Learning software’s alignment with SOR and its

objectives, classroom teachers were asked to participate in a brief online survey. Teachers were

sent a Microsoft Forms online link to answer a two-question survey about their insights on the

level of alignment of Amira Learning software and the Science of Reading (SOR). The survey

                                                  53
asked the teachers, “How would you rate the effectiveness of Amira Learning software in

accomplishing the goals of the Science of Reading?” and “How aligned is Amira Learning

software with the Science of Reading?”. For each question, the teachers were provided the

categorical measures to represent their responses. The first question had teachers choose one of

the following responses: not effective, effective, highly effective. The second question had the

teachers choose from the following responses: no alignment, moderate alignment, high

alignment. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the teachers’ responses on this survey.

                                              Summary

           The present study sought to investigate the effects of an AI program, Amira Learning

software, on literacy development in early childhood education. Amira Learning software is an

Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) designed to

improve oral reading fluency for early learners. The study used a quantitative research

methodology to systematically collect and analyze numerical data to answer the research

questions. The focus was on whether the AI application was effective in enhancing oral reading

fluency in early learners. To ensure rigor and coherence, the study followed a statistical approach

and adhered to a well-articulated research design, which served as a comprehensive plan to

address the research questions. The data collection methods retrieved the necessary information

for the study, and the chosen statistical tests were based on the type of data and research

questions to provide accurate and meaningful results. The present study's use of quantitative

methods and statistical analysis aimed to draw valid conclusions and produce accurate and

reliable findings to contribute to the growing interest in AIEd and its potential applications in

education, especially in response to the challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic on human

capital.

                                                  54
       This chapter provided an overview of the present study, covering essential aspects like

research paradigm, definition of key terms, setting and context, ethical considerations, data

sources, data analysis, and research design. In Chapter Four, the quantitative results of the

present study are discussed.




                                                55
                              CHAPTER FOUR. RESULTS

Effects of Amira Learning on Pre and Post Test Oral Reading Fluency Scores

       The present study aimed to investigate the effects of an AI program, Amira Learning, on

literacy development in early childhood education. The impact of Amira Learning was explored

through analysis of the difference in the students’ pretest and posttest oral reading fluency scores

following the 6-week usage of the software.

       A Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the Amira

Learning software in enhancing the oral reading fluency (ORF) of first-grade students. This

analysis compared pretest and posttest ORF scores, providing valuable insights into the impact of

the usage. The results revealed a substantial and statistically significant difference in ORF scores

between the pretest (Mdn = 19.0, IQR = 0-126) and posttest (Mdn = 47.0, IQR = 4-149) conditions,

Z= -7.67, p < .001. There was a notable increase in the median ORF score from 19.0 before the

usage to 47.0 after its completion. The accompanying rank results provided additional insights into

the comparison of ORF scores: notably, there were no negative ranks, indicating that in all

instances, the ORF posttest scores surpassed their corresponding pretest scores. A total of 78

positive ranks were observed and one tie was recorded between ORF pretest and ORF posttest

scores, which was a singular instance of identical scores. The improvement in scores ranged from

0 (from pretest and posttest tied) to 61 words correct per minute (WCPM). Table 1 presented Oral

Reading Fluency (ORF) scores for first-grade students in a suburban Louisiana school district (N

= 79) before (Pre) and after (Post) a six-week usage of Amira Learning software.




                                                56
Table 1. Comparison of Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Scores Before and After Amira Learning

Usage


                                        Pretest                             Posttest

Variable                       M (SD)        Mdn (IQR)             M (SD)         Mdn (IQR)



Oral Reading Fluency
                            29.57 (30.02)    19.0 (0-126)       49.05 (31.63)    47.0 (4-149)
Score




        The box plot, Figure 2, illustrated the distribution of ORF scores for first-grade students

before (pretest) and after (posttest) usage of Amira Learning Software, which was conducted over

a 6-week period. The central line within each box represented the median ORF score, while the

box itself spanned the interquartile range (IQR). Whiskers extend to the minimum and maximum

values within 1.5 times the IQR. This revealed a substantial improvement in ORF scores among

first-grade students following the six-week usage of the Amira Learning software. The median

ORF score post-usage notably surpassed the pre-usage median.


Figure 2. Effects of Amira Learning Usage on First-Grade Students' Oral Reading Fluency
(ORF) Scores




                                                  57
       The pie chart, Figure 3, showed the percent per category increase in the ORF scores of

first grade students. The trajectory for average growth was to see an improvement in ORF scores

by about 2 WCPM per week (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2017). A total of 34% (27/79) of the students

gained between 0-11 word correct per minute (WCPM) in ORF after the 6-week usage of Amira

Learning. Out of the 79 students, 33% (26/79) were reported to have increased their scores by

12-23 WCPM, 22% (17/79) increased their scores by 24-35 WCPM, and 11% (9/79) gained 36

or more WCPM in their ORF posttest.

Figure 3. Growth in Oral Reading Fluency (WCPM scores)




                                       11%                      0--11
                                               34%
                                                                12 -- 23
                                 22%
                                                                24--35

                                                                36 & above
                                        33%




Relationship Between Time Spent on Amira Learning and Oral Reading Fluency

       The first research question addressed in the present study was “What is the relationship

between the time spent using Amira Learning software and learners' oral reading fluency

achievement levels?” This research question aimed to examine the relationship between the

amount of time students spent using the Amira Learning software over a six-week period (Amira

Learning average usage in minutes) and the improvement in their ORF scores as measured by

DIBELS Next (www.acadeincelearning.org, n.d.). Specifically, it sought to understand whether

there was a connection between the extent of software usage and the degree of improvement in

reading fluency. Additionally, the research question aimed to assess the predictive value of Amira


                                               58
Learning average usage in determining the enhancement in oral reading fluency scores. In essence,

it explored the role of software usage in influencing learners' reading fluency improvements.

       A linear regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between Amira

Learning software usage, specifically Amira Learning average usage in 6 weeks (in minutes),

and learners' ORF improvement scores. The study included a sample of 79 participants, and ORF

improvement scores denoted the difference between pretest and posttest assessments. The

dependent variable in this analysis was ORF improvement.

       Table 2 displayed the results of a linear regression analysis examining the relationship

between Amira Learning average usage in 6 Weeks (in minutes) and learners' ORF improvement

scores. Figure 4, the scatter plot, illustrated the relationship between Amira Learning average

usage in 6 weeks (in minutes) and learners' ORF improvement scores. Each point on the plot

represented an individual participant within the sample of 79. The x-axis denoted the time spent

using Amira Learning, while the y-axis represented the improvement in ORF scores. The scatter

plot demonstrated a scattered distribution of points, suggesting that while there was a modest

positive association between Amira Learning average usage and ORF improvement, there was

variation in improvement scores among participants.

       The results of analysis revealed a significant model effect, F (1, 77) = 4.79, p = .032. This

indicated that the model, which included Amira Learning average usage as a predictor, provided

a statistically significant explanation for variance in the ORF improvement scores. R2 value of

0.059, suggesting that approximately 5.9% of the variance in the ORF improvement scores can

be attributed to the independent variable, Amira Learning average usage. Subsequently,

unstandardized coefficients demonstrated that, after controlling for the constant, each additional

minute allocated to using Amira Learning over a six-week period was associated with an



                                                59
increase of 0.20 units in ORF improvement scores (B = 0.20, SE = .09, t = 2.19, p = .032).

Additionally, a standardized coefficient (β = 0.24) indicated a positive and moderately strong

relationship between Amira Learning average usage and ORF improvement scores.



Table 2. Linear Regression Analysis: Relationship Between Amira Learning Usage and ORF

improvement


                         Unstandardized          Standardized
                          Coefficients           Coefficients
 Predictor                B        SE            β        t              R2         F


                                                                        0.06      4.79*
 Constant                14.90     2.48                 6.01***
 Amira Average            .20       .09         .24     2.19*
 Usage in 6 Weeks
 (in Min)




Figure 4. Scatter Plot - Relationship Between Amira Average Usage and ORF improvement




                                               60
Amira Learning’s Feedback and Improving Oral Reading Fluency

       A second research question was investigated in the present study. This research question

asked “How effective is the feedback provided by Amira Learning in improving students’ oral

reading fluency?”. Amira Learning tutoring was equated to the feedback that Amira Learning

provided the students, hence, the association between Amira Learning tutoring and the

improvement in ORF scores among learners was explored. This research question sought to

understand whether increased engagement with Amira Learning tutoring, as indicated by

additional tutoring time, was linked to significant improvements in ORF scores. Additionally, the

question studied the predictive value of Amira Learning tutoring time in determining the

enhancement in learners' oral reading fluency.

       Table 3 displayed the results of a linear regression analysis examining the relationship

between Amira Learning tutoring time in 6 weeks (in minutes) and learners' ORF improvement

scores. The sample size consisted of 79 participants. ORF improvement scores represent the

difference between pretest and posttest scores. Dependent variable was the ORF improvement. b

represented unstandardized regression weights. SE indicated standard error of b. β indicated the

standardized regression weights. R2 indicated variances predicted by the independent variables.

*Indicated p < .05, **indicated p < .01** indicated p < .001

       Figure 5, a scatter plot, showcased the connection between Amira Learning tutoring time

in 6 weeks (in minutes) and learners' ORF improvement scores. Each data point corresponds to a

participant from the sample of 79 individuals. The x-axis represented the time invested in Amira

Tutoring, while the y-axis displayed the enhancement in oral reading fluency scores. The scatter

plot revealed a dispersed arrangement of data points, indicating variability in improvement

scores among participants. However, the linear regression analysis uncovered a significant


                                                 61
relationship (p < .05), demonstrating that greater time spent with Amira Tutoring corresponded

to substantial improvements in oral reading fluency.

       The second results of a linear regression analysis examining the association between

Amira Learning tutoring time in 6 weeks (in minutes) and learners' ORF improvement scores

were presented in Table 3. The model's overall statistical significance was evaluated using an F-

test, which yielded a significant result, F (1, 77) = 4.46, p = .038. This indicated that the model,

including Amira Learning tutoring time as a predictor, held explanatory power. The R2 value

(0.05) illustrated that approximately 5.5% of the variance in ORF improvement scores can be

attributed to the independent variable, Amira Learning tutoring time. The regression coefficients

showed that, after controlling for the constant, for every additional minute spent using Amira

Tutoring over a six-week period, there was an associated increase of 0.30 units in ORF

improvement scores (B = 0.30, SE = 0.14, t = 2.11, p = .038). The standardized coefficient (β =

0.23) indicated a positive and moderate relationship between Amira Learning tutoring time and

ORF improvement.



Table 3. Linear Regression Analysis: Relationship Between Amira Learning Tutoring Time and

ORF Improvement


                          Unstandardized           Standardized
                           Coefficients            Coefficients
 Predictor                 B        SE             β        t              R2          F


                                                                          0.05       4.46*
 Constant                 14.98      2.52                 5.94***
 Amira Learning            .30        .14         .23      2.11*
 tutoring time in 6
 Weeks (in Min)



                                                 62
Figure 5. Scatter Plot - Relationship Between Amira Learning tutoring time and ORF
improvement




       To further investigate the relationship between Amira Learning tutoring time in 6 weeks

(in minutes) and learners' ORF posttest (Post-ORF) scores, while controlling for ORF pretest

(Pre-ORF) scores, a multiple linear regression was conducted . A two-step multiple linear

regression analysis was conducted to explore the relationship between Amira Tutoring Time in 6

weeks (in minutes) and learners' post-ORF scores, while considering pre-ORF scores. In the first

model, it was observed that both pre-ORF scores (B = 0.95, SE = .05, β = 0.90, t = 20.46, p <

.001) and Amira Tutoring Time (B = 0.34, SE = .15, β = 0.10, t = 2.33, p = .022) significantly

predicted post-ORF scores. This initial model accounted for a substantial proportion of the

variance in post-ORF scores (R² = 0.86). Subsequently, a second model introduced an interaction

term between pre-ORF scores and Amira Tutoring Time to examine whether Amira Learning

feedback impact on performance differed depending on the learners' initial fluency levels. In this

second model, pre-ORF scores (B = 0.95, SE = .05, β = 0.90, t = 19.19, p < .001) and Amira

Tutoring Time (B = 0.34, SE = .15, β = 0.10, t = 2.31, p = .023) remained significant predictors


                                                63
of post-ORF scores, while the interaction term was not significant (t = -0.005, p = .996). Table 4

showed the results of the multiple linear regression.



Table 4. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis: Relationship Between Amira Tutoring Time and

Post Oral Reading Fluency Score While controlling Pre- Oral Reading Fluency Score


                          Unstandardized          Standardized
                           Coefficients           Coefficients
 Predictor                 B        SE            β        t             R2         F


 Model 1
                                                                        0.86    237.04***
 Constant                49.05      1.34                36.61***
 Pre-ORF                  .95        .05         .90    20.46***
 Amira Tutoring           .34        .14         .10     2.33**

 Model 2
                                                                        0.86    155.95***
 Constant                 49.05                         35.53***
 Pre-ORF                   .95                   .90    19.19***
 Amira Tutoring            .34                   .10     2.31**
 Pre-ORF X Amira         -.0002      .01        .000     -.005
 Tutoring




Teachers’ Perceptions on Amira Learning and Science of Reading

       A third research question focused on the topic of Amira Learning and its alignment with

the Science of Reading. The question that was explored in the present study was: “What is the

level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning’s alignment to the Science of

Reading (SOR) and its effectiveness in fulfilling the Science of Reading objectives?”. The

question sought to understand the collective viewpoint of teachers regarding Amira Learning's

alignment with SOR and its effectiveness in fulfilling SOR objectives. It explored teachers'

                                                64
perspectives on the extent to which Amira Learning has aligned with the Science of Reading and

its perceived role in achieving these educational goals.

         In the final research question, two separate chi-square goodness-of-fit analyses were

conducted to assess the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning's

alignment with the Science of Reading and its effectiveness in achieving Science of Reading

goals.

Alignment Rating

         Regarding the alignment of Amira Learning with the Science of Reading, participants

were asked to rate the alignment as no alignment, moderate alignment, or high alignment.

Results indicated that 3 teachers (17.6%) perceived moderate alignment, while a significant

majority of 14 teachers (82.4%) perceived high alignment. None of the teachers who participated

perceived low alignment with SOR. A chi-square test was performed, revealing a statistically

significant result χ2(1) = 7.12, p = .008.

Effectiveness Rating

         For the question concerning the effectiveness of Amira Learning in achieving Science of

Reading goals, teachers were asked to rate the AIEd as either not effective, effective, or highly

effective. The observed frequencies indicated that 8 teachers (47.1%) rated it as effective, while

9 teachers (52.9%) rated it as highly effective. A chi-square test yielded a non-significant result

χ2(1) = .059, p = .808, indicating no significant deviation from the expected distribution. These

results suggest that teachers generally agree on the effectiveness of Amira Learning in achieving

SOR goals. A chi-square test yielded a non-significant result χ2(1) = .059, p = .808, indicating no

significant deviation from the expected distribution. These results suggest that teachers generally

agree on the effectiveness of Amira Learning in achieving SOR goals.A chi-square test yielded a



                                                 65
non-significant result χ2(1) = .059, p = .808, indicating no significant deviation from the

expected distribution. These results suggest that teachers generally agree on the effectiveness of

Amira Learning in achieving SOR goals.

Table 5. Teachers' Ratings of Amira Learning's Alignment and Effectiveness in Achieving Science

of Reading Goals


Variable                                              N                %


Alignment Rating of Amira Learning with
the Science of Reading
    Moderate Alignment                                3               17.6

   High Alignment                                     14              82.4



Effectiveness Rating of Amira Learning in
Achieving Science of Reading Goals
     Effective                                        8               47.1

    Highly Effective                                  9               52.9




Figure 6. Amira Learning’s Alignment and Effectiveness Rating




                                                 66
             CHAPTER FIVE. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS


       The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of Amira Learning, an

Artificial Intelligence (AI) program, on the literacy development in early childhood education.

Specifically, it sought to determine 1) the relationship between the time spent using Amira

Learning and learners' oral reading fluency (ORF) achievement levels; 2) the effectiveness of the

feedback provided by Amira Learning software in improving students’ oral reading fluency; and

3) the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning software’s alignment to the

Science of Reading and its effectiveness in fulfilling the Science of Reading objectives.


Amira Learning and Oral Reading Fluency

       The present study delved into investigating the effects of an Artificial Intelligence in

Education (AIEd) program on oral reading fluency (ORF) of first grade students. ORF has been

established in the literature as a critical measure of overall reading success and an indicator of

reading progress (Hintze et.al., 2002; Jenkins, et.al., 2003; Schatschneider et.al., 2002; Speece

& Ritchey, 2005). In the early stages of reading, children learn to decode words and understand

the relationship between sounds and letters. Fluent reading at this stage is crucial because it

allows students to focus less on decoding individual words and more on understanding the

meaning of the text. Fluent readers are better equipped to comprehend what they read, which

has also been a fundamental goal of reading instruction.


       The results of the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test (Wilcoxon, 1945) to evaluate the

efficacy of Amira Learning software in enhancing ORF of first-grade students suggested a

statistically significant difference in ORF scores between the pretest and posttest median scores.

The substantial increase in postest median ORF scores of the students after the 6-week usage of

Amira Learning software denotes the positive effect of using AIEd to improve ORF, one of the

                                                 67
foundational literacy measures. What was also notable about this increase in median scores was

the change in the DIBELS Next benchmark bands from Below Benchmark at pretest to At

Benchmark at posttest.


       DIBELS Next (www.acadiencereading.org, n.d.) establishes benchmark scores for each

grade level to serve as reference points for assessing students' reading skills. The benchmark

categories have been used to help educators assess and monitor students' reading proficiency

to determine when intervention is needed. These categories are based on grade-level

expectations and provide a framework for understanding students' progress in early literacy

skills. Each category indicates how students perform on the assessment based on grade-level

expectations and each score represents the predicted literacy outcomes for the students. The

DIBELS Next categories Above Benchmark, At Benchmark, Below Benchmark, and Well

Below Benchmark.


       Students in Above Benchmark category perform at a level that exceeds grade-level

expectations. They demonstrate strong proficiency in the assessed skill, and their performance

suggests a high level of competence. Students in Above Benchmark may not require additional

intervention or support in the assessed skill. Students in At Benchmark category perform at a

level that aligns with grade-level expectations. They meet the expected standard for their grade

in the assessed skill. Being At Benchmark is an indicator that a student has achieved a reasonable

level of proficiency and is on track for reading success at their grade level.


       Students in Below Benchmark category perform below the grade-level expectations for

the assessed skill. They may be struggling with the skill to some extent, and their performance

suggests that they may benefit from additional support or targeted instruction. Being Below

Benchmark indicates a need for closer monitoring and possibly intervention.


                                                 68
       Students in Well Below Benchmark category are significantly below the grade-level

expectations for the assessed skill. They have typically been at the greatest risk for reading

difficulties or literacy challenges. Students in Well Below Benchmark require intensive and

specialized intervention and support to improve their skills and catch up to their peers

(www.acadiencereading.org, n.d.).


       Prior to the use of Amira Learning software, the average score of the students was Below

Benchmark which predicted that typical students in the grade level will likely need additional

support, such as intervention or tutoring, to become successful in reading. Students who were

unable to receive the support needed will likely be at more risk of reading deficits in the future.

Providing this level of support to individual students can be labor-intensive for teachers and their

class size and daily schedule may prevent them from providing the level of support and feedback

that each student needs. After the 6-week usage of and interaction with Amira Learning software,

the average ORF score of the students was a level higher which was At Benchmark category,

which predicted successful achievement of reading outcomes provided that the students receive

high-quality core English Language Arts (ELA) instruction. Using the Amira Learning software

as an intelligent reading tutor allowed all students the support and feedback that they needed to

progress in their reading skills without providing additional teaching staff or using extensive

class periods to attend to individual student needs.


       Another noteworthy effect of Amira Learning software on the students’ ORF scores was

the amount of growth on individual scores that were recorded from pretest to posttest. Amira

Learning software was able to positively affect the students’ accuracy and rate of reading as

measured by the number of words correct per minute (WCPM). Consistent with the principles

of the Skilled Reader, these gains in ORF posttest meant that students will be more equipped

for language comprehension. This result suggested positive effects of Amira Learning software

                                                 69
on ORF even when used in a relatively short period.


        To address the first research question “What is the relationship between the time spent

using Amira Learning software and learners' oral reading fluency achievement levels?” A linear

regression analysis was conducted to assess this connection, which focused specifically on

Amira Learning software average usage over a six-week period. The analysis demonstrated a

significant model effect and implied that the inclusion of Amira Learning software usage as a

predictor in the model offered a statistically significant explanation for the variance observed in

the ORF improvement scores. In other words, there was a meaningful relationship between

how much time students spend using Amira Learning software and their ORF score

improvements. This underscored the potential benefits of incorporating Amira Learning

software into reading instruction to support students in developing their reading skills

effectively.

        These findings were consistent with the results of a study by Consortium for Policy

Research in Education (2021) when Savannah-Chatham County Public School (SCCPSS)

partnered with Amira Learning software to improve literacy outcomes. The study explored the

effects of Amira Learning software on four literacy outcomes, including ORF. The study span

over two different periods, fall to winter and winter to spring. The findings of this study shed

light on the connection between the frequency of Amira Learning software usage and the

growth in WCPM over the fall-to-winter period. Specifically, for each additional week of

usage, there was a statistically significant increase of 0.030 standard deviations in WCPM

scores (p < .001).

The results of the present study found a correlation between the amount of time students spent

using Amira Learning software and the notable improvement in their ORF scores. This implied

Amira Learning software, as an ITS, has acknowledged that learning should be an ongoing

                                                70
process. Amira Learning software's approach has encouraged continuous improvement by

adapting content and difficulty levels based on individual progress, thus supporting the idea that

learning to read has never been a one-time event but a continuous journey that will impact

overall reading success with consistent use. These can be related with the theory of mastery of

learning which has acknowledged the differences in the pace at which learners acquire

knowledge and has highlighted the significance of allowing students ample time for achieving

mastery (Bloom, 1968; Guskey, 2005).

Amira Learning Feedback and Oral Reading Fluency

       To fully investigate Amira Learning software’s impact on students’ ORF scores, two

statistical analyses were conducted. These ensured the credibility of the results that the

improvement in ORF posttest scores can be attributed to Amira Learning feedback. Results of

the present study demonstrated that Amira Learning software tutoring time or feedback, was

responsible for the increase in DIBELS Next ORF scores of the first grade students. This result

aligned with the theory of mastery learning (Bloom, 1968) which has underscored the

significance of ongoing evaluation of students' learning to track their advancement and deliver

prompt feedback. The present study investigated the efficacy of the feedback offered by Amira

Learning software in directing learners toward mastery and supporting their learning outcomes

in early reading. When students do not achieve mastery at first, Bloom (1968) suggested that

feedback and opportunities for remediation should be offered to students. In the light of the

present study, Amira Learning software’s feedback mechanisms and adaptive nature allowed

students to receive feedback and additional practice when needed, supporting the concept of

revisiting and reinforcing learning until mastery has been achieved. Although not all students

achieved At Benchmark status on the DIBELS ORF posttest, a notable 66% of the students who

used Amira Learning software and engaged in the feedback process increased their ORF scores


                                                 71
by 12 points or more, denoting a positive literacy outcome in just six weeks.

       The findings also supported Blooms’ (1968) theory which emphasized progressing from

lower-order thinking skills (e.g., in literacy decoding and blending) to higher-order thinking

skills (e.g., fluent reading and comprehension). Amira Learning software's approach has been

designed to scaffold learning, starting with foundational skills and gradually moving students

toward more complex reading tasks and higher-order thinking, thus aligning with Bloom's

taxonomy. Amira Learning has claimed to offer feedback and support, while also allowing the

students the opportunity to engage in productive struggle and to practice their reading skills

(www.amiralearning.com, n.d.).


       In the context of the Skilled Reader theory, the findings of the present study indicated

that Amira Learning software, as an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS), effectively offers

instruction and feedback to support the development of individual students into skilled readers.

The study's results highlighted the efficacy of Amira Learning software software’s feedback in

improving students' ORF. Amira Learning software has followed the research around skilled

readers and has conformed to SOR principles as evidenced by the results of the present study,

which has also been consistent with the research by Consortium for Policy Research in

Education (2021). Amira Learning software has taken pride in encouraging students to use their

abilities to read and not rely on the cueing system to guess and has worked on individual

students to strengthen their ORF skills (www.amiralearning.com, n.d.).


       The results of the present study demonstrated that Amira Learning software’s feedback

was consistent with the principles of Simple View of Reading (SVR), Scarborough’s (2001)

Reading Rope, and the Five Pillars of Literacy as evidenced by the growth in WCPM across

the board, regardless of students’ pretest score. In other words, Amira delivered the mix of


                                                72
what was necessary for reading success, decoding and language comprehension which resulted

in increased ORF posttest scores.


Teachers’ Insights on Amira Learning and the Science of Reading

       The third research question of the present study explored teachers’ insights regarding

Amira Learning software’s alignment with the Science of Reading (SOR) and its effectiveness in

fulfilling SOR objectives. The teachers who participated in the present study recently completed

SOR training that consisted of 50 hours of asynchronous, modular work and 6 1-hour

synchronous discussion sessions with other participants and the facilitator of the training. At the

time of participation, the teachers had completed Amira Learning software implementation

training and had the opportunity to use Amira Learning software for a period of six months.


       The teachers’ responses to the online survey showed teachers’ belief in Amira

Learning’s ability to teach young students according to SOR. In both of the questions they had

to answer, there was no recorded response that negatively associated Amira Learning software

with SOR. This supported the idea of teachers’ insights that Amira Learning software was

designed and implemented in a way that was consistent with the scientific understanding of

how reading skills are acquired and developed. SOR has an evidence-based approach to

literacy instruction that has drawn from decades of research in cognitive psychology,

linguistics, neuroscience, and education (Moats, 1999; Moats 2020; Science of Reading:

Defining Guide, 2022). Based on these responses, teachers felt that the software has followed

the evidence-based practices and principles that have been shown to be effective in teaching

reading skills to young students.

       The results of the teacher survey also suggested that the teachers had high confidence in

allowing Amira Learning software to instruct and provide feedback to their students despite the


                                                73
controversies surrounding using AIEd in early childhood education. Although the teachers

were not asked to explain their responses, the inclusion criteria ensured that all teachers who

participated had sufficient knowledge of the objectives of SOR and Amira Learning

software, following the intensive training they completed for SOR and Amira Learning

software implementation.


       As teachers expressed their confidence regarding the alignment of Amira Learning

software with SOR and its effectiveness in fulfilling its objectives, the present study has

also acknowledged its connection to the mastery learning theory (Bloom, 1978). Consistent

with Bloom's (1978) theory, the teachers' responses highlighted how Amira Learning

software provided students with instruction using well-defined learning goals, sequential

progression, individualized pacing, and using assessments to drive instruction.


       In essence, both SOR and mastery learning principles have emphasized the importance

of clearly defined and specific learning objectives. SOR has placed great importance on

foundational skills such as phonological awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, and

fluency, recognizing them as essential components for achieving overall reading proficiency.

This alignment with the mastery learning approach, which has established explicit and

measurable goals for students, was evident. While Amira Learning software has not offered

whole group, explicit instruction, as an intelligent tutor, it has provided individualized

opportunities for students to practice their reading skills while receiving timely, focused

feedback based on their reading needs.

       SOR has recognized the significance of a structured progression aligned with the

developmental stages of reading acquisition. This progression was based on research into how

children learn to read and the cognitive processes involved. While the exact progression may


                                                 74
vary based on student individual needs, the general progression has been from less complicated

reading skills to the more sophisticated ones. This suggested that phonemic awareness comes

first before fluency, which will come first before comprehension. Similarly, mastery learning has

often organized objectives in a sequential manner, ensuring that students have achieved mastery

of prerequisite skills before moving on to more advanced ones. This alignment has reinforced

the concept that students established a solid groundwork before engaging in more complex

reading tasks. Amira Learning software has pledged to provide the right amount of scaffolds

through feedback that has been aligned with SOR to meet students’ reading needs.


       Both SOR and mastery learning have promoted individualized pacing. SOR has

recognized that students may progress at different rates and require different levels of support.

In the same manner, mastery learning has allowed students to proceed at their own pace,

receiving additional instruction and support as needed until they achieve mastery. This

individualized approach has ensured that all students have had the opportunity to master the

content. Amira Learning, as it has advertised, has offered personalized instruction while

adapting content and difficulty levels based on each student's performance. This individualized

approach has been aligned with the customization of instruction in both SOR and mastery

learning.


       SOR and mastery learning have both emphasized the alignment of assessments with

learning objectives and have used them to guide future instruction. In SOR, assessments

have been used to monitor student progress and identify areas of strength and weakness in

reading skills. SOR has placed a strong emphasis on providing feedback and support to

students to help them develop reading skills. In mastery learning, assessments have been

closely tied to specific objectives, ensuring that students meet predefined criteria for


                                                 75
mastery. Mastery learning has also highlighted the importance of feedback and has offered

opportunities for remediation when students do not achieve mastery on assessments. This

feedback loop has been essential for both approaches to support student learning. Both SOR

and mastery learning have recognized that learning is an ongoing and continuous process,

therefore, assessments should be used to inform future instruction. Amira Learning software

actively listened as students read aloud, capturing the session and producing an objective

running record that was free from subjective inaccuracies and testing biases. Its AI

capability made it possible for Amira Learning software to adjust the rigor of stories and

feedback based on previous reading sessions.


       Ultimately, the goal of reading instruction has been to develop skilled readers who are

fluent, are able to comprehend what they read, and apply their knowledge of reading into

different context or content, demonstrating mastery of their learning. The principles of skilled

reader and mastery learning both have supported the idea that all learners can become skilled

readers when provided with appropriate instruction, feedback, assessment, and time for

learning. They have recognized that reading proficiency is a developmental process and that

strong foundational skills are crucial for success in reading and overall academic achievement.


Limitations


       The present study has acknowledged the possible biases in data analyses due to the

limited access to data. Other variables and external factors not considered in this study could

have influenced the outcomes of the study. Some of these factors include student

demographics such as age, socioeconomic status, or educational background, variations in

teacher competence, differences in the teaching pedagogies, and additional services received

by students such as small group instruction, interventions, or human tutoring outside of

                                                76
school. Given that the present study did not use a control group nor controlled variables when

running data analyses, the results yielded may have been affected. The duration of the study

was relatively short and could have been extended to capture longer-term effects or changes

that could occur over time.


       Responses from teacher participants may have been partial because of the teachers’

relationship with the researcher, who was their curriculum specialist. Although the participants

were assured that the survey was anonymous and confidential, their responses might have been

influenced by their worry of being judged because of their knowledge of Amira Learning

software or SOR or being identified based on their responses because of the small number of

participants in the study.


Clinical Implications


       The positive effects of Amira Learning software on literacy development in early

childhood education are multifaceted and can have several significant clinical implications for

educators, administrators, policymakers, stakeholders, and AI program creators. As Amira

Learning has been considered a determinant in improving ORF scores, the present study has

highlighted the importance of early intervention and feedback in literacy development

(Guskey, 2005). The present study supports previous research that recognizes that identifying

and addressing reading difficulties in early childhood can prevent future, long-term academic

challenges (Shanahan, 2020; Moats, 2020, Petscher, et al.., 2021; Science of Reading: Defining

Guide, 2022).

       The results of the present study implied that incorporating an AIEd intelligent tutor into

early childhood education can lead to improved reading and literacy outcomes for young

learners. Amira Learning software's adaptive nature could allow early childhood educators to

                                                77
better tailor their instruction to individual student needs, promoting personalized learning

experiences (Wijekumar, et al., 2018) without the burden of planning and facilitating one-on-

one sessions with every student every day. Using Amira Learning software can also suggest that

early intervention using technology-based literacy programs can be effective. Educators can

consider incorporating software such as this into early childhood interventions to prevent

having students who will be at risk of literacy difficulties in the future. Amira Learning software

may underscore the importance of data-driven assessment and progress monitoring. Educators

can use the reports generated from the platform to track children's literacy development over

time, enabling more informed decisions about intervention strategies and classroom instruction.

Amira Learning software's data collection and analysis capabilities can enable educators a low

labor-intensive, yet accurate measure to make data-driven decisions about students' progress.

This implies a need for data literacy among educators.


       Administrators can benefit from the results of the present study by using the information

presented in making informed decisions about technology purchases and staffing.

Administrators who wish to use Amira Learning software should consider other factors related

to the use of the software such as access to high-speed, reliable internet, dependable electronic

devices, and other additional supplies such as headsets with a microphone. The aftermath of

Covid-19 depleted the workforce and made it hard for administrators to find teachers and

support staff. Amira Learning software can be utilized as a low-cost, non-labor intensive

personalized reading tutor to address the staffing issue without sacrificing the quality of support

offered to the students.

       This study also has the potential to influence policymakers in their decisions to allocate

resources for schools and early childhood education centers to acquire and implement

educational technology like Amira Learning software. Although the present study only

                                                78
measured results for first grade students, the results show promise and could be scaled across

the state for all students. The present study's findings may also shed light on potential

disparities in access to educational technology. In light of the positive results found in this

study, policymakers should consider issues of equity to ensure that all students, regardless of

their background, can have access to AIEd and that technology infrastructures, such as the

internet and computers, are available to our most vulnerable populations.


       The positive effects of Amira Learning software may have encouraged parents to engage

with their children's education by using the software or similar technology at home. Using Amira

Learning software or other literacy-based AIEd may provide parents the supplemental tool to

support their child's literacy development at home. It can serve as an additional resource to

reinforce what children are learning in school. The interactive nature of Amira Learning

software and the immediate feedback given to students may help in motivating young children

to engage in educational activities at home. At the time of writing the present study, home

access to Amira Learning software was available for students via the district’s online learning

platform. The platform can only be accessed through the district-provided Chromebook, which

was not sent home to students in the early grades. The results of the present study may drive

parents to become advocates for equitable access to technology-based learning tools, ensuring

that all children have the opportunity to benefit from effective resources regardless of their

background or location.

       AI creators may have also been influenced by the alignment of Amira Learning software

with SOR and be inspired to create similar technology to support early readers. The positive

impact of AI-powered educational tools like Amira Learning software on early childhood

literacy development suggests that AI creators should focus on continuous improvement, ethical

considerations, and collaboration with educational stakeholders to maximize the benefits of AI

                                                 79
in education while addressing challenges and ensuring accessibility and inclusivity.


Recommendations for Future Research


       The findings from the present study revealed critical information on using an AIEd in the

form of an intelligent tutor to improve literacy outcomes for young children. Several future

research can be done based on the results of the present study to further expand understanding of

the potential benefits and challenges associated with integrating AIEd during this crucial stage

of learning.


       Longitudinal studies to examine the long-term effects of Amira Learning software on

literacy development can help determine whether early gains in literacy skills are sustained over

time. An investigation on whether the effectiveness of Amira Learning software varies across

different demographic groups, such as students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds or

with varying levels of prior literacy skills would be valuable. Future researchers can conduct

comparative studies to evaluate the effectiveness of Amira Learning software in comparison to

other literacy interventions and instructional approaches commonly used in early childhood

education. Exploring the impact of teacher training and ongoing support in maximizing the

benefits of Amira Learning software can also be a topic of interest in the future. Additionally,

research can focus on how well-prepared educators are in integrating AIEd effectively into their

teaching practices. A study on motivation and engagement to investigate the impact of Amira

Learning software on students' motivation, engagement, and attitudes towards reading and

literacy can also be explored.


       Conducting qualitative studies to gain deeper insights into the experiences of teachers

and students using Amira Learning software should be considered. Qualitative data can provide

                                                80
a richer understanding of the learning process and can enable researchers to investigate the

challenges and barriers that educators may face when integrating Amira Learning software into

their curriculum, including technical issues, time constraints, and resource limitations.


By addressing these research areas, future studies can provide valuable insights into the role

of an intelligent AIEd tutor like Amira Learning software in early childhood education and

inform best practices for leveraging technology to support literacy development in young

learners.


                                           Conclusion


       Overall, the results of data analyses and the evaluation of the connections to the

theoretical frameworks of the present study have indicated that Amira Learning software, as

an AI intelligent tutor, provided students with a strong foundation in ORF, feedback, and

ongoing assessment information to teachers. Additionally, teachers confirmed this program as

being in alignment with the Science of Reading literature. The Amira Learning software

platform’s individualized instruction has prioritized student learning and achievement as the

central goals of its tutoring sessions while continuously growing individual students based on

their unique needs. Amira Learning has given the students the 1-on-1 attention they need,

something that would have not been possible if not for the power of AI.

                                            Summary


       The present study sought to answer the following questions to explore the overarching

goal of the study which was to investigate the effects of Amira Learning software on literacy

development in early childhood education.




                                                81
       RQ1: What is the relationship between the time spent using Amira Learning and

learners' oral reading fluency achievement levels?


       RQ2: How effective is the feedback provided by Amira Learning in improving

students’ oral reading fluency?


       RQ3: What is the level of agreement among teachers regarding Amira Learning’s

alignment to the Science of Reading and its effectiveness in fulfilling the Science of

Reading objectives?


       This chapter discussed the results of the data analyses, answered the research questions,

and offered explanations on the findings as they relate to the theoretical frameworks of mastery

learning (Bloom, 1968) and the skilled reader. It also discussed the limitations of the study, the

implications for practice, and recommendations for future research to inform practice in the

areas of early childhood education, educational technology, and literacy development.




                                                82
      APPENDIX A. CENTRAL TENDENCY TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure A1. Frequencies of the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Scores at Pretests




Figure A2. Frequencies of the Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) Scores at Posttests




Figure A3. Frequencies of Amira Average Usage Minutes in 6 Weeks




                                             83
Figure A4. Frequencies of Amira Tutoring Time Average in 6 Weeks




Regression Model 1 – IV: Amira Average Usage in 6 Weeks (in Min


Figure A5. Histogram of Regression Standardized Residual of ORF Improvement




Figure A6. Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual of ORF Improvement




                                           84
Figure A7. Testing the Homoscedasticity Assumption for Regression of ORF Improvement




Regression Model 2 – IV: Amira Tutoring Time in 6 Weeks (in Min)
Figure A8. Histogram of Regression Standardized Residual of ORF Improvement




Figure A8. Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual of ORF Improvement




                                           85
Figure A9. Testing the Homoscedasticity Assumption for Regression of ORF Improvement




                                           86
APPENDIX B. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD




                  87
                    APPENDIX C. INFORMED CONSENT FORMS

                           School/ District Administrator Consent Form

1.    Study Title: The Effects of Amira Learning on Literacy Development in Early Childhood
      Education

2.    Purpose of the Study: The main purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of an
      Artificial Intelligence program, Amira Learning, on literacy development of first grade
      students. Secondary data will be used to delve into this goal. As part of exploring this main
      goal, the study also aims to understand teachers’ insights on Amira Learning’s alignment
      with the Science of Reading. Teachers will be asked to take a two-question survey to rate
      their agreement on the alignment of Amira Learning with the Science of Reading. The survey
      should take no more than 5 minutes to take and will be administered using a secured,
      protected platform (MS Forms). The teachers will not be asked any identifying information
      during this survey.


3.    Risks: There is no anticipated risk associated with participation in the study.

4.    Benefits: There will be no direct benefit to the subjects for participating in this study.
      However, it is hoped that the information obtained from this study may drive district’s future
      decisions on obtaining programs that support teachers and in exploring additional online
      classroom resources and interventions.

5.    Investigators: The following investigators are available for questions about this study, please
      contact Dr. Cynthia DiCarlo (cdicar2@lsu.edu) or Ms. Caroline Tolentino (ctolen2@lsu.edu)

6.    Number of Subjects: 17

7.    Inclusion Criteria: Teachers who hold a valid Louisiana teaching license, who are over the
      age of 18, and who have been trained in the Science of Reading. To participate in this study,
      the requirements of both the inclusion and exclusion criteria must be met.

13.   Exclusion Criteria: Teachers without a valid Louisiana teaching license, are under the age of
      18, and have not been trained on the Science of Reading.

14.   Right to Refuse: Subjects may choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any
      time without penalty or loss of any benefit to which they might otherwise be entitled.
      information will be included for publication.

15.   Privacy: Results of the study may be published, but no names or identifying information will
      be included in the publication. Subject identity will remain confidential unless disclosure is
      required by law.

                                                   88
16.   Financial Information: There is no cost for participation in the study, nor is there any
      compensation to the subjects for participation.

17.   Signatures:
      ______ I consent for the researcher to use secondary data requested and for teachers to
      participate in the study if they wish to. The study has been discussed with me and all my
      questions have been answered. I may direct additional questions regarding study specifics to
      the investigator. If I have questions about subjects' rights or other concerns, I can contact
      Alex Cohen, Chairman, Institutional Review Board, (225) 578-8692, irb@lsu.edu, or
      www.lsu.edu/research. I will allow the use of students’ data in the study described above
      and acknowledge the investigator's obligation to provide me with a signed copy of this
      consent form.

        ______ I do not consent to participation in this study.


Superintendent Name (printed or typed): _________________________________________

Superintendent Signature: ________________________________ Date:________________




                                                   89
                                  Teacher Consent Form


1.   Study Title: The Effects of Amira Learning on Literacy Development in Early Childhood
     Education


2.   Purpose of the Study: The main purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of an
     Artificial Intelligence program, Amira Learning, on literacy development of first grade
     students. Part of exploring this main goal is to understand teachers’ insights on Amira
     Learning’s alignment with the Science of Reading. Your participation is needed to
     accomplish this secondary goal.


3. Risks: There is no anticipated risk associated with participation in the study.


4. Benefits: There will be no direct benefit to you for your participation in this study.
     However, it is hoped that the information obtained from this study may drive district’s
     future decisions on obtaining programs that support teachers and in exploring additional
     online classroom resources and interventions.


5. Investigators: The following investigators are available for questions about this study, Dr.
     Cynthia DiCarlo, (cdicar2@lsu.edu) or Ms. Caroline Tolentino (ctolen2@lsu.edu)


6. Number of subjects: 17


7. Inclusion Criteria: Teachers who hold a valid Louisiana teaching license, who are over
     the age of 18, and who have been trained in the Science of Reading. To participate in this
     study, you must meet the requirements of both the inclusion and exclusion criteria.


8. Exclusion Criteria: Teachers without a valid Louisiana teaching license, are under the age
     of 18, and have not been trained on the Science of Reading.




                                             90
9. Right to Refuse: Subjects may choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at
   any time without penalty or loss of any benefit to which they might otherwise be entitled.


10. Privacy: Results of the study may be published, but no names or identifying information
   will be included in the publication. Subject identity will remain confidential unless
   disclosure is required by law.


11. Signatures:
   The study has been discussed with me and all my questions have been answered. I may
   direct additional questions regarding study specifics to the investigators. For injury or
   illness, call your physician, or the Student Health Center if you are an LSU student. If I
   have questions about subjects' rights or other concerns, I can contact Alex Cohen,
   Institutional Review Board, (225) 578-8692, irb@lsu.edu, or www.lsu.edu/research. I
   agree to participate in the study described above and acknowledge the investigator's
   obligation to provide me with a signed copy of this consent form.

 Subject Signature: ____________________________ Date: ________________

   The study subject has indicated to me that he/she is unable to read. I certify that I have
   read this consent form to the subject and explained that by completing the signature line
   above, the subject has agreed to participate.

Signature of Reader: ____________________________ Date: _______________




                                            91
                                       REFERENCES
Abdelsalam, U. M. (2014). A proposal model of developing intelligent tutoring systems based on
      mastery learning. In The Third International Conference On E-Learning In
      Education (pp. 106-118).

Alkhatlan, A., & Kalita, J. (2018). Intelligent tutoring systems: A comprehensive historical
       survey with recent developments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.09628.
Amira. (n.d.). www.amiralearning.com. https://www.amiralearning.com/

Amira Learning. (n.d.). White paper: Amira is Science of reading [White paper].
      https://amiralearning.com/documents/White-Paper-Amira-Is-The-Science-Of-
      Reading.pdf

Atun H. (2020). Intelligent tutoring systems (its) to improve reading comprehension: a
      systematic review, Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 2(2), 77-89.

Bailey, D. H., Duncan, G. J., Murnane, R. J., & Au Yeung, N. (2021). Achievement gaps in the
        wake of COVID-19. Educational Researcher, 50(5), 266-275.

Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Instruction and Curriculum. Regional Education
      Laboratory for the Carolinas and Virginia, Topical Papers and Reprints, Number
      1. Evaluation comment, 1(2), n2.

Bloom, B. S. (1975). Evaluation, Instruction and Policy Making. IIEP Seminar Paper: 9.

Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as
      effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational researcher, 13(6), 4-16.

Bredekamp, S. (2020). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs
      serving children from birth through age 8 (4th edition). National Association for the
      Education of Young Children. 1313 L Street NW Suite 500, Washington, DC 22205-
      4101.

Britto, P. (2015, December 15). Why early childhood development is the foundation for
        sustainable development. Www.unicef.cn. https://www.unicef.cn/en/stories/why-early-
        childhood-development-foundation-sustainable-development




                                                92
Broda, M., & Frank, A. (2015, October). Learning beyond the screen: assessing the impact of
       reflective artificial intelligence technology on the development of emergent literacy
       skills. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government,
       Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 753-758). Association for the Advancement of
       Computing in Education (AACE).

Chavez, R. (2021, November 16). Louisiana public schools grapple with learning lost to
      pandemic surges and storms. PBS. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/90-percent-of-
      kindergarteners-in-louisiana-arent-ready-for-school-thanks-to-pandemic-disruptions

Chen, X., Xie, H., & Hwang, G. J. (2020). A multi-perspective study on artificial intelligence in
       education: Grants, conferences, journals, software tools, institutions, and
       researchers. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100005.

Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (2021).
      https://www.amiralearning.com/documents/Matches-Human-Tutoring-After-30-
      Sessions.pdf

Department for Business Innovation & Skills. (2016). Success as a knowledge economy:
      Teaching excellent, social mobility and student choice [White paper]. Crown.
      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/523396/bis
      -16-265-success-as-a-knowledge-economy.pdf

Dias, M. J., Almodóvar, M., Atiles, J. T., Vargas, A. C., & Zúñiga León, I. M. (2020). Rising to
       the Challenge: Innovative early childhood teachers adapt to the COVID-19
       era. Childhood Education, 96(6), 38-45.

Dong, Y., Yu, X., Alharbi, A., & Ahmad, S. (2022). AI-based production and application of
      English multimode online reading using multi-criteria decision support system. Soft
      Computing, 26(20), 10927-10937.


Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E. (2021). COVID-19 and education: The
       lingering effects of unfinished learning. McKinsey & Company, 27.

Dynamic Measurement Group. (2011). Phase 2 DIBELS Next Data Interpretation Workshop.

Eyisi, D. (2016). The usefulness of qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in
        researching problem-solving ability in science education curriculum. Journal of education
        and practice, 7(15), 91-100.




                                               93
Ford, T. G., Kwon, K. A., & Tsotsoros, J. D. (2021). Early childhood distance learning in the US
       during the COVID pandemic: Challenges and opportunities. Children and Youth Services
       Review, 131, 106297.

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an
       indicator of reading competence: A theoretical, empirical, and historical
       analysis. Scientific studies of reading, 5(3), 239-256.

Golberstein, E., Wen, H., & Miller, B. F. (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and
       mental health for children and adolescents. JAMA pediatrics, 174(9), 819-820.

Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and
      special education, 7(1), 6-10.

Grimshaw, J., Campbell, M., Eccles, M., & Steen, N. (2000). Experimental and quasi-
      experimental designs for evaluating guideline implementation strategies. Family
      practice, 17(suppl_1), S11-S16.

Guo, L., Wang, D., Gu, F., Li, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhou, R. (2021). Evolution and trends in
       intelligent tutoring systems research: a multidisciplinary and scientometric view. Asia
       Pacific Education Review, 22(3), 441-461.

Guskey, T. R. (2005). Formative classroom assessment and Benjamin S. Bloom: Theory,
      research, and implications. Online submission.

Harris, A. D., McGregor, J. C., Perencevich, E. N., Furuno, J. P., Zhu, J., Peterson, D. E., &
        Finkelstein, J. (2006). The use and interpretation of quasi-experimental studies in medical
        informatics. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 13(1), 16-23.

Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2017). An update to compiled ORF norms (No. 1702). Technical
      report.

Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2003). Applied statistics for the behavioral
       sciences. (No Title).

Hintze, J. M., Callahan III, J. E., Mathews, W. J., Williams, S. A. S., & Tobin, K. G. (2002).
       Oral reading fluency and prediction of reading comprehension in African American and
       Caucasian elementary school children. School Psychology Review, 31, 540–553.

Hoofman, J., & Secord, E. (2021). The effect of COVID-19 on education. Pediatric
     Clinics, 68(5), 1071- 1079.

                                                94
International Society for Technology in Education. (2019). ISTE standards.
        https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/PDF/ISTE%20Standards-One-Sheet_Combined_09-
        2021_vF3.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education (2020, January 10). Innovative designer 4D:
        Open-ended problems (ISTE standards for students). [Video file]. YouTube.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvCc3D6XNrg&list=PL6aVN_9hcQEGNw8OUN-
        5Cc_dogE1Q4gqo&index=4

Jenkins, J. R., Fuchs, L. S., van den Broek, P., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of
       individual differences in reading comprehension and reading fluency. Journal of
       Educational Psychology, 95, 719–729.

Jeong, H. I., & Kim, Y. (2017). The acceptance of computer technology by teachers in early
       childhood education. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(4), 496-512.

Ji, X. R., Beerwinkle, A., Wijekumar, K., Lei, P., Malatesha Joshi, R., & Zhang, S. (2018).
        Using latent transition analysis to identify effects of an intelligent tutoring system on
        reading comprehension of seventh-grade students. Reading and Writing, 31, 2095-2113.

Knudsen, E. I., Heckman, J. J., Cameron, J. L., & Shonkoff, J. P. (2006). Economic,
      neurobiological, and behavioral perspectives on building America’s future
      workforce. Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences, 103(27), 10155-10162.


Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in
      educational contexts. International Journal of higher education, 6(5), 26-41.

LaBerge, L., O’Toole, C., Schneider, J., & Smaje, K. (2020). How COVID-19 has pushed
      companies over the technology tipping point—and transformed business
      forever. McKinsey & Company, 5.

LeMoine, S. (2020). Power to the Profession Task Force: Foundational to Early Childhood
      Education. ZERO TO THREE, 40(3), 20-23.


Lindner, A., & Romeike, R. (2019). Teachers' perspectives on artificial intelligence. In 12th
       International conference on informatics in schools,“Situation, evaluation and
       perspectives”, ISSEP.




                                                95
Loble, L., & Hawcroft, A. (2022). Shaping AI to Tackle Australia’s Learning Divide


Lock, R. H., & Welsch, R. G. (2006). Increase oral reading fluency. Intervention in School and
       Clinic, 41(3), 180-183.

Louisiana Department of Education. (2022). Act no. 108.
       https://legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1232840

Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An
       argument for AI in education.

Lurye, S. (2023, May 17). “Mississippi miracle”: Kids’ reading scores have soared in Deep
       South states. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/reading-scores-phonics-mississippi-
       alabama-louisiana-5bdd5d6ff719b23faa37db2fb95d5004

Ma, W., Adesope, O., Nesbit, J., & Liu, Q. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems and learning
      outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of educational psychology, 106(4), 901.

McCarthy, J. (2007). From here to human-level AI. Artificial Intelligence, 171(18), 1174-1182.

Meta- Analysis of Research on Amira: Intelligent tutoring's Impact Amira Learning. (2022,
       July).Retrieved from https://www.amiralearning.com/research.html

Moats, L. C. (1999). Teaching reading is rocket science: What expert teachers of reading should
       know and be able to do.

Moats, L. C. (2020). Teaching reading "is" rocket science: What expert teachers of reading
       should know and be able to do. American Educator, 44(2), 4.

Mousavinasab, E., Zarifsanaiey, N., R. Niakan Kalhori, S., Rakhshan, M., Keikha, L., & Ghazi
      Saeedi, M. (2021). Intelligent tutoring systems: a systematic review of characteristics,
      applications, and evaluation methods. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(1), 142-
      163.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidenced-based assessment of
       the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction.
       https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf




                                               96
Nickow, A., Oreopoulos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring on prek-12
      learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence.

Passow, A. (2019, January 3). How k-12 schools have adopted artificial intelligence: AI
      integration offers new potential to improve student outcomes and security. EdTech Focus
      on K-12. https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2019/01/how-k-12-schools-have-
      adopted-artificial-intelligence

Petscher, Y., Cabell, S. Q., Catts, H. W., Compton, D. L., Foorman, B. R., Hart, S. A., ... &
       Wagner, R. K. (2020). How the science of reading informs 21st‐century
       education. Reading research quarterly, 55, S267-S282.

Plitnichenko, L. (2020, May 30). 5 main roles of artificial intelligence in education. eLearning
        Industry. https://elearningindustry.com/5-main-roles-artificial-intelligence-in-education

Poletti, M. (2020). Hey teachers! Do not leave them kids alone! Envisioning schools during and
         after the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Trends in neuroscience and education, 20,
         100140.

PwC. (2017). Sizing the prize: What’s the real value of AI for your business and how can you
      capitalise? https://www.pwc.com/ gx/en/issues/analytics/assets/pwc-ai-analysis-sizing-
      the-prize -report.pdf

Queirós, A., Faria, D., & Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and
       quantitative research methods. European journal of education studies.

Roscoe, R. D., Allen, L. K., Weston, J. L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). The
      Writing Pal intelligent tutoring system: Usability testing and development. Computers
      and Composition, 34, 39-59.

Russo, A. (2020, October 20). Recession and automation changes our future of work, but there
       are jobs coming, report says. World Economic Forum.
       https://www.weforum.org/press/2020/10/recession-and-automation-changes-our-future-
       of-work-but-there-are-jobs-coming-report-says-52c5162fce/

Sabates, R., Carter, E., & Stern, J. M. (2021). Using educational transitions to estimate learning
       loss due to COVID-19 school closures: The case of Complementary Basic Education in
       Ghana. International Journal of Educational Development, 82, 102377.




                                                97
Samuelsson, I. P., & Kaga, Y. (Eds.). (2008). The contribution of early childhood education to a
      sustainable society (pp. 1-136). Paris: Unesco.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities:
       Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for
       research in early literacy. New York: Guilford Press.

Science of Reading: Defining Guide. (2022). The Reading League.

Schatschneider, C., Carlson, C. D., Francis, D. J., Foorman, B. R., & Fletcher, J. M. (2002).
       Relationship of rapid automatized naming and phonological awareness in early reading
       development. Implications for the double-deficit hypothesis. Journal of Learning
       Disabilities, 35, 245–256.

Schwartz, S. (2022, July 20). Which states have passed “Science of Reading” laws? What’s in
      them?. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/which-states-have-
      passed-science-of-reading-laws-whats-in-them/2022/07

Seidenberg, M. S. (2013). The science of reading and its educational implications. Language
       learning and development, 9(4), 331-360.

Sentell, W. (2022, January 18). New report highlights literacy problems in Louisiana: “It is
        unfathomable.” The Advocate.
        https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/new-report-highlights-
        literacy-problems-in-louisiana-it-is-unfathomable/article_661a2d1c-77cb-11ec-a678-
        23cdb6577031.html

Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction?. Reading Research
      Quarterly, 55, S235-S247.

Spatz, C. (2019). Exploring statistics: Tales of distributions. Outcrop Publishers.

Speece, D. L., & Ritchey, K. D. (2005). A longitudinal study of the development of oral reading
       fluency in young children at risk for reading failure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38,
       387–399.

Straker, L., Zabatiero, J., Danby, S., Thorpe, K., & Edwards, S. (2018). Conflicting guidelines on
       young children's screen time and use of digital technology create policy and practice
       dilemmas. The Journal of pediatrics, 202, 300-303.



                                                98
Su, J., & Yang, W. (2022). Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping
        review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100049.

Touretzky, D., Gardner-McCune, C., Martin, F., & Seehorn, D. (2019, July). Envisioning AI for
       K-12: What should every child know about AI?. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference
       on artificial intelligence (Vol. 33, No. 01, pp. 9795-9799).

UNESCO. (2020). National education responses to Covid-19 summary report of UNESCO’s
     online survey. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373322.

Unicef. (2017). Programme guidance for early childhood development Unicef programme
       division 2017. https://www.unicef.org/media/107616/file/UNICEF-Programme-
       %20Guidance-for-Early-Childhood-Development-2017.pdf

Unicef. (2020). Policy guidance on AI for children.
       https://www.unicef.org/globalinsight/media/1171/file/UNICEF-Global-Insight-policy-
       guidance-AI-children-draft-1.0-2020.pdf.

Van Lancker, W., & Parolin, Z. (2020). COVID-19, school closures, and child poverty: a social
      crisis in the making. The Lancet Public Health, 5(5), e243-e244.

Wijekumar, K. K., Meyer, B. J., & Lei, P. (2013). High-fidelity implementation of web-based
      intelligent tutoring system improves fourth and fifth graders content area reading
      comprehension. Computers & Education, 68, 366-379.

Wijekumar, K., Meyer, B. J., Lei, P. W., Lin, Y. C., Johnson, L. A., Spielvogel, J. A., ... & Cook,
      M. (2014). Multisite randomized controlled trial examining intelligent tutoring of
      structure strategy for fifth-grade readers. Journal of Research on Educational
      Effectiveness, 7(4), 331-357.

Wilcoxon, F. (1945). Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biom Bull 1 (6): 80–83.

World Health Organization. (2023, May 18). WHO COVID-19 dashboard. World Health
      Organization. https://covid19.who.int/

Yang, W. (2022). Artificial Intelligence education for young children: Why, what, and how in
      curriculum design and implementation. Computers and Education: Artificial
      Intelligence, 3, 100061.


Zhang, D., Mishra, S., Brynjolfsson, E., Etchemendy, J., Ganguli, D., Grosz, B., ... & Perrault, R.
       (2021). The ai index 2021 annual report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.06312.

                                                99
Zorić, A.B. (2020). Benefits of educational data mining. Journal of International Business
       Research and Marketing, 6(1), 12-16.




                                              100
                                             VITA

       Caroline C. Tolentino, a native of the Philippines and naturalized citizen of the United

States, received her bachelor’s degree from the University of the Philippines, Diliman in 2004.

She taught in the Philippines from 2004 until right before she migrated to Baton Rouge

Louisiana in 2008. She became a kindergarten teacher and instructional specialist in Baton

Rouge where she served for more than 10 years before moving to Ascension Parish. Caroline’s

passion for educating young students and her love for learning made her decide to pursue her

graduate degree. In 2015, she was admitted to the master’s program at the Louisiana State

University, College of Human Sciences and Education. She obtained her master’s degree in 2017

and educational specialist degree in 2020.

       Caroline has taught undergraduate courses, teaching preservice teachers in PK3 Early

Childhood Program since 2020. In 2021, she became an instructional coach in Ascension Parish

supporting teachers and students in the elementary grades. In her career as an educator, she has

presented at numerous conferences, published academic articles, received several teaching

awards, and wrote a number of grants. Caroline intends to obtain her Ph.D. in Curriculum and

Instruction in December 2023.




                                               101