O n f e r e n c e

Short paper 
The current research
Reading plays a significant role in early literacy development. Snow, Burns, and Griffin 
(1988) stated that children who read well in the early grades can get the right start, and 
that those who have lower reading proficiency often stay behind when it comes to 
academic achievement. In addition, National Reading Panel (2000) identified oral reading 
fluency as one of the five skills necessary for reaching reading proficiency. Reading 
fluency is vital to the readers’ reading comprehension because it is the bridge between 
decoding and reading comprehension. Fluent readers can accurately and correctly 
recognize words, and use their prosodic and syntactic knowledge to better comprehend 
the text (Grabe, 2004).
Rasinski (2012) also proposed that “fluency puts it at the center 
of authentic reading instruction in which 
the aim of students’ reading is comprehension” 
(p.517).
LarBerge and Samuels (1974) first defined fluent reading as reading competence where 
text is read effortlessly, smoothly, and automatically. Automaticity theorists proposed 
that if more attention is spent on decoding each word, less reading comprehension is 
achieved (Kuhn, 2005). If learners can not automatically and accurately blend the sounds 
together and recognize the words, they may have negative influences on their reading 
comprehension. Furthermore, automaticity is usually measured by reading speed. Rate 
means reading speed 
–
either the number of words read correctly per minute or the 
length of time it takes for a reader to complete a passage (Hudson, Lane, & Pullen, 
2005). Several reading fluency instructions emphasized the improvement of reading rate 
because slow reading makes readers comprehend the text weakly (Hudson, et al., 2005; 
Mastropieri, Leinart & Scruggs, 1999).
Moreover, National Reading Panel (2000) proposed that fluency is the ability to read text 
with speed and accuracy. Rasinski (2004) pointed out that the components of reading 
fluency are the accuracy in speech, appropriate speed, and phrasing and appropriate 
expression as well. 
Paige, Rasinski, and Magpuri
‐
Lavell 
(2012) pointed out that “
fluent 
readers, when reading orally, exhibit prosody that reflects the meaning of the text.” 
(p.73
). Hence, reading fluency should be referred as reading text with appropriate rate, 
and accuracy. 
Several empirical studies also demonstrated the importance of becoming a fluent reader 
(Hudson, 2005; Kuhn, 2005; Rasinski, 2006). Thus, reading fluency can be an indicator 
of reading comprehension. 
Mustafa
(2013) conducted a study to examine the relationship 
between 90 Turkish fourth-
graders students’ reading habits and their reading 
comprehension. The result showed that fluent reading was an indicator of 
comprehension. Since reading fluency plays an important role in early literacy 
development, instruction aiming at promoting lear
ners’ 
oral reading fluency have been 
emphasized by educators (Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp & Jenkins, 2001; Gorsuch & Taiguchi, 
2010; Kuhn & Stahl, 2003; Rasinski, 2006 & 2012).
Repeated reading has been shown as an evidence-based effective instruction for 
improving reading fluency (Kuhn & Stahl, 2003; NICHD, 2000; LarBerge & Samuels, 
1979). Repeated reading is an evidence-based effective instruction of oral reading 
fluency (Gorsuch & Taguchi, 2010; Kuhn, 2005; Lo, Cook, & Starling, 2011; Oddo, 
Barnett, Hawkins, & Musti-Rao, 2010; Rasinki, 2012; Savaiano & Hatton, 2013; 
Schrauben, 2010). It was derived from the automaticity theory (LaBerge & Samuels, 
1974), which is a theory of automatic information processing and has been used for three 
decades to explain the complex task of reading (Schrauben, 2010). In addition, the 
National Reading Panel (2000) also pointed out that repeated reading is an effective 
direct teaching method which can improve learners overall reading achievement.

---

-210- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
The method of repeated reading requires a reader to reread passages of their reading 
level so that the reader can read faster and requires less attention to decode with each 
reading (Samuels, 1979). Also, Lo, et al., (2011) investigated an adult-directed repeated 
reading program on three at-risk second-grade students, and the results showed that 
repeated reading actually enhanced the participants reading fluency. Moreover, based on 
Samuel (1979), the procedure of utilizing repeated reading instruction involves (a) 
selecting a short passage a
ccording to learners’ reading level; (b) creating a criterion, 
and (c) making students read and reread the passage over several times until the 
criterion is reached.
There are several kinds of repeated reading instructions, such as (a) the direct 
instruction (i.e., Lo, Cook, & Starling, 2011); (b) teacher-assisted repeated reading (i.e., 
Hapstack & Tracey, 2007) (c) computer-assisted repeated reading (i.e., Gibson, et al., 
2011) (d) peer-assisted repeated reading (i.e., Oddo, et al., 2010). Assisted reading 
involves a less-fluent reader reading and another fluent reader and they read the same 
text (Paige et al., 2012). Based on Paige et al. (2012), assisted reading can be practiced 
through the form of reading with a partner, reading while listening to a recorded version, 
or reading with a group of other readers. Hapstack and Tracey (2007) examined the 
effects of teacher-assisted repeated reading on four American first graders whose reading 
ability varied, and the results showed that teacher-assisted repeated reading actually 
improved 
learners’ reading fluency. Oddo et al., (2010) evaluated the effects of peer
-
assisted repeated reading on 17 fourth-
graders’ oral reading fluency in America, and 4 of 
the participants are at-risk readers.
The results showed that peer-assisted repeated reading enhanced reading fluency and 
reading comprehension of the 4 targeted students as well as class wide performance in 
fluency and comprehension. In addition, acceptability ratings showed that the small 
group format containing at least
a relatively high ORF scores student, a relatively 
average ORF scores student, and a low ORF scores student, was easy to implement and 
acceptable to the teacher and students. Furthermore, Gibson et al., (2011) conducted a 
preliminary study to verify the effects on 8 African first 
graders’ oral reading fluency, 
reading growth rate and comprehension through computerized repeated reading program 
for 14-16 weeks. The results showed that all the participants increased their reading 
fluency; 5 of 8 participants reduced their risk status; and 7 of 8 participants increased 
their reading rate. All the participants improved their comprehension scores as well. The 
result supported the use of the computer-based reading program 
Read Naturally
.
Peer-assisted strategies have been shown as an effective strategy which can provide 
peers error identification, immediate feedback and correction, and encouragement (Oddo 
et al., 2010). Additionally, results of a few empirical studies have revealed that the 
Read 
Naturally
software edition is an effective computer-assisted repeated reading program 
which includes “computer modeling”, repeated reading and progress monitoring. The 
software program was found to 
enhance L1 learners’ reading fluency (Gibson et al. 
2011).
Teacher-assisted repeated reading, computer-assisted repeated reading, and peer-
assisted repeated reading instructions are evidence-based effective instructions. Kuo and 
Chiang (2012) have compared the effects of teacher-assisted vs. computer-assisted 
repeated reading instruction on oral reading fluency development of 5
th
graders’ in 
Taiwan. The present study thus aims to first examine Taiwanese 
EFL young learners’ 
perceived oral reading fluency improvement after receiving the respective learner-
centered intervention, ie., computer-assisted repeated reading and peer-assisted 
repeated reading instruction.
Based on this purpose, three research questions are developed as follows. 

---

-211- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
1.
What are Taiwanese EFL young learners’ perceptions of the effectiveness of 
computer-assisted repeated reading and peer-assisted repeated reading? 
2.
What are Taiwanese EFL young learners’ attitudes toward the features of 
computer-assisted repeated reading and peer-assisted repeated reading? 
3.
What are Taiwanese EFL young learners’ acceptance l
evels of the computer-
assisted repeated reading and peer-assisted repeated reading intervention?