writingresearch

//important considerations for written language for students with LD.//
=** Williams, S.C. (2002). How speech-feedback and word-prediction software can help ** ** students write. //Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(3), 72-78// **//. // =  **Research Question:** Will replacing traditional paper and pencil writing with speech-feedback and word-prediction software improve the written expression of learning disabled students? **Subject:** The subjects of this study were six seventh-grade students with learning disabilities in written expression. One student in particular, J.T. was profiled more closely in this article. **Setting:** The six seventh-grade students attend school in a K-8 rural North Carolina town.
 * Review written by Tim Henson, Spring 2008**

__**Research Methodology**:__ **Design**: The six students in this study used Co: Writer and Write: Outloud software during daily journal writing sessions. The use of these software interventions took the place of traditional journal writing activities with pencil and paper. During journal writing time, the six participants went to the school’s computer lab in order to have access to these programs. Each day they were given a 20 minute block of time in order to complete their journal entries for that day. The journal entries from each phase of the study were evaluated by a blind reviewer using a holistic scoring system. **Dependent Variable:** By using the software interventions, all six participants in this study wrote longer papers and expressed less apprehension in writing. **Independent Variable:** Traditional paper and pencil journal writing was replaced by two software intervention programs – Co: Writer and Write: Outloud for participants. **Results:** All six participants in this study wrote longer papers and expressed less apprehension in writing after replacing traditional paper and pencil writing with Co: Writer and Write: Outloud software. In particular, J.T. increased the length of his papers from an average of 36.9 words during baseline to an average of 60.28 words using the software intervention. The passages composed by J.T. with the use of this assistive technology were longer and of higher quality when evaluated by the reviewer. In addition, the number of questions asked for spelling assistance declined from an average of 9 questions per journal session in the beginning of this process to 3 or less per session after the intervention. **Discussion/Implications:** These types of assistive software offer promise for students like J.T. and others struggling with written expression. However, in keeping with the recommendations by MacArthur (1998), the decisions concerning which software is better suited for a particular student or group of students must be on a case-by-case basis. As with any assistive technology, the effectiveness of the program will be determined by its use in assisting students. One drawback in the study was the fact that none of the journal entries were ever extended into a piece of writing that was evaluated by the participant’s teacher or shared with other members of the class. In assignments that were taken to the final draft stage the software was not made available to the classroom teacher. Even so, assistive technologies like the ones used in this study, hold the potential to be powerful writing supports for struggling students. When mechanical struggles can be eliminated for students with disabilities, the students can then focus on what they have to express rather than concentrating on how to get their thoughts on paper. **Analysis:** The outcomes of this study were very interesting. Although assistive technologies such as the two software programs used in this study can be powerful supports for students with learning disabilities, the author states that “assistive technologies are not a replacement for instruction.” Free writing does improve the quality of a students’ writing, just as simply introducing a software support to students who already struggle can have a positive effect on written composition. I believe this is just another positive effect of Universal Design. If questions still linger about whether this should be the method of structure in our schools, then school stakeholders should take a serious look at studies such as this one involving J. T. Using this software and others like it would benefit many students. Not only those who struggle with learning or have a diagnosed disability but those who do not.

**Links to additional articles on Writing Research and use of Technology:** 
 * __ [|Speech Recognition-based and Automaticity Programs to Help Students with Severe Reading and Spelling Problem] __**
 * [|Assistive Technology for Students with Learning Disabilities: An Overview]**