LeapPad/Tag Reading System:
An Analysis Based on the Multimedia Learning Principals
LeapPad/Tag Reading System
*An electronic interactive children’s book
for children aged 4-8.
*Purpose to help with reading and literacy
*Produce by LeapFrog Enterprises from
*Average Cost: $50/unit + $15/book
*A form of computer assisted instruction.
*Tag Reading System superseded the
*Leap Track (Campuzano et al. 2009)
Spatial Contiguity Principle
The LeapPad has a perfect layout for the
Pictures and words are presented right
after each other.
Temporal Contiguity Principle
Another beauty of LeapPad is when you use your
pencil touch the pictures on the book, you can
find the words and pictures are presented
Right on the target.
No extraneous words or pictures
will come out.
There are sound effects.
Illustrations and Narration come
Redundancy Principle Eliminates extraneous cognitive
Advantages of LeapPad:
fast and continuous
Make this a pause button
An introduction to the story is provided
*Key story elements are not given
*Key words are not defined
*Readers are not prompted to use a
specific decoding or comprehension
Olivia is a precocious pig.
This story is a day in the life of
Olivia. It doesn’t follow a problem
and solution format.
Make connections between Olivia’s
life and yours as you read.
Yes, there are no digital animations
to distract me! (Reinking, D. 2005)
*Should I listen to the entire page?
Or read it word by word?
*Should I access the comprehension
*What word did I just read?
*What are the key words on the
*Is it important that I know the
meaning of that word?
*Am I really ready to move on? (Florida
Center For Reading Research, 2003)
A beneficial change:
Different words have different
Is this really a problem for
children? (Reinking, D. 2005)
Comprehension questions are
asked using the first person
Introduction to story does not make
direct comments to the learner
Do you think…?
Individual Difference Principle
Normal Bottom-Up Process of Learning to Read: (Blok et al., 2002)
1. Pre-Reading: A a
2. Decoding: A or a /ah/ and /c/ /a/ /t/ cat
3. Fluency/Comprehension: The cat lives in the hat (Time: 5 seconds)
LeapPad/Tag designed for:
2. Decoding ⇔ Fluency/Comprehension
LeapPad/Tag only supports: (Romig et al., unknown)
low end users ⇒ ⇑ fluency, basic comprehension (oral retell)
high end users ⇒ ⇑ fluency, basic comprehension (oral retell) and
late-stage decoding (phonics)
Thus, need Leap Track, Leap Desk, Leap Mat
(Ogura et al., 2007)
Compared to Books
Principle LeapPad/Tag compared to Picture Books
Spatial Continguity LeapPad/Tag = Picture Books
Temporal Continguity LeapPad/Tag = Picture Books
Coherence LeapPad/Tag < Picture Books
Modality LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
Redundance LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Segmenting LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Pretraining LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Signaling LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) = Picture Books
Personalization LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
Voice LeapPad/Tag < Picture Books
Individual Difference LeapPad/Tag (potential for improvement) > Picture Books
•Blok H., Oostdam, R., Otter, M.E., and Overmat, M. (2002). Computer-Assisted Instruction in Support of
Beginning Reading Insruction: A Review. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 101-130.
•Campuzano, L., Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., and Rall, K. (2009). Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics
Software Products: Findings From Two Student Cohorts (NCEE 2009-4041). Washington, DC: National Center
for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of
•Florida Center For Reading Research. (2003, October). LeapTrack Assessment & Instructional System.
Retrieved from: http://www.fcrr.org/reports.htm
•Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., and Reifsneider, D. (2009). Technology in schools: What the research says: An
update. Culver City, CA: Commissioned by Cisco.
•Mayer, R.E., & Chandler, P.(2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster
deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-813
•Mayer, R.E., & Dow, G., Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interaction foster deeper understanding
of multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based
microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-81
•Mayer, R.E.,& Moreno,R. (1998). A spilt attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing
system in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2). 312-320.
•Miller, W. (1937). The picture crutch in reading. Elementary English Review, 14, 263-264.
•Ogura, P., Coco, L., Bulat, J. (2007). Using innovative technology to foster reading development among young
children with severe cognitive impairments. TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, 4(1)Article 3.
•Reinking, D. (2005). Multimedia learning if reading. In Mayer, R.E. (Ed.) The cambridge handbook of
multimedia learning (pp. 355-374). New York: Cambridge University Press.
•Romig, N., Yan, B., Zhao, Y. (Unknown). Impact of inexpensive interactive technology on early literacy
development. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University.