Seventeen males and twelve females wrote essays under three conditions: (a) without assistance; (b) using a human transcriber; and (c) using a speech recognition system. Students received higher holistic scores using speech recognition than when writing without assistance at a statistically significant level (p=.048). In order to determine the reasons for the superior scores on the essays written using speech recognition, 22 measures of fluency, vocabulary and syntax were computed. Several measures showed a strong correlation with the holistic score. A multiple regression revealed that the best predictor of the holistic score was Words with Seven or More Letters. Further, the ratio of Words with Seven or More Letters to Total Words differed significantly across conditions (p=.0136), in favor of speech recognition, when compared with receiving no assistance. A factor analysis identified three factors that accounted for significant variation in holistic score: Factor 1, measures related to length of the essay (p=.0001+); Factor 2, measures of morphological complexity (p=.003); and Factor 3, main verbs (p=.021). The authors suggest that the technology may have been successful because it “encouraged” the use of longer words, a powerful predictor of a holistic score.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarenbaumE.NewcomerP.NodineB. (1987). Children's ability to write stories as a function of variation in task, age and developmental level. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 175–188.
2.
BlalockJ. (1981). Persistent problems and concerns of young adults with learning disabilities. In CruickshankW.SilversA. (Eds.), Bridges to tomorrow: The best of ACLD, Vol. II (pp. 31–45). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
3.
BovairS.KierasD. (1985). A guide to propositional analysis for research on technical prose. In BrittonB.K.BlackJ.B. (Eds.), Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text (pp. 315–362). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4.
BrownC. (1987). Computer access in higher education for students with disabilities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education.
5.
CarrollJ.B. (1964). Language and thought. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
6.
CordoniB. (1979). Assisting dyslexic college students: An experimental design at a university. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 29, 263–268.
7.
CrowderR.G. (1982). The psychology of reading: An introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
DavisA.L. (1949). Wordatlas of the great lakes region. Microfilm diss. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
9.
DenoS.MarstonD.MirkinP. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Exceptional Children, 28, 358–371.
10.
EinsteinG.O.NocksE.C. (1987). Learning to use SPSS. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
11.
FrudeN. (1987). A guide to SPSS/PC+. New York: Springer-Verlag.
12.
GajarA.H. (1989). A computer analysis of written language variables and a comparison of compositions written by university students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 125–130.
13.
GajarA.H.HarrimanN. (1987). Identifying data based procedures for written expression disabilities at the university level. Education, 107, 252–258.
14.
GouldJ.D. (1980). Experiments on composing letters: some facts, some myths and some observations. In GreggL.W.SteinbergE.R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 97–127). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
GreggK.N. (1983). College learning disabled writers: Error patterns and instructional alternatives. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 334–338.
16.
HammillD.D.LarsenS.C. (1978). Test of Written Language. Austin, TX: PRO-ED Services for Professional Educators.
17.
HammillD.D.LeighJ.E.McNuttG.LarsenS.C. (1981). A new definition of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 336–342.
18.
HeddersonJ. (1991). SPSS/PC+ made simple. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
19.
HouckC.BillingsleyB. (1989). Written expression of students with and without learning disabilities: Differences across the grades. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 561–572.
20.
HowellM. (1956). Differentiating variables in compositions of seven-year-olds. Elementary School Journal, 57, 145–149.
21.
HuntK.W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development: 35 (1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
KingM.L.RentelV.M. (1981). Research update: Conveying meaning in written texts. Language Arts, 58, 721–728.
23.
KintschW.KeenanJ. (1973). Reading rate and retention as a function of the number of propositions in the text base of sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 257–274.
24.
KlimaE.S.BellugiU. (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
MacArthurC.GrahamS. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing and dictation. The Journal of Special Education, 21 (3), 22–42.
26.
MangrumC.T.StrichartS.S. (1984). College and the learning disabled student: A guide to program selection, development and implementation. Orlando, FL: Grune & Stratton, Inc.
27.
MoranM.R. (1981a). Comparison of formal features of written language of learning disabled, low-achieving and achieving secondary students. Lawrence, KS: Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
28.
MoranM.R. (1981b). Performance of learning disabled and low achieving secondary students on formal features of a paragraph-writing task. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 271–280.
29.
MorrisN.CrumpW.D. (1982). Syntactic and vocabulary development in the written language of learning disabled and non-disabled students at four age levels. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 163–172.
30.
MyklebustH.R. (1973). Development and disorders of written language: Studies of normal and exceptional children (Vol. 2). New York: Grune & Stratton.
31.
NewcomerP.BarenbaumE. (1991). The written composing ability of children with learning disabilities: A review of the literature from 1980 to 1990. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 578–593.
32.
NodineB.F.BarenbaumE.NewcomerP. (1985). Story composition by learning disabled, reading disabled and normal children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 167–179.
33.
NorusisM.J. (1990). SPSS/PC+ 4.0 Base manual for the IBM PC/XT/AT and PS/2. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
34.
NorusisM.J. (1993). SPSS for windows: Advanced statistics. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
35.
PoteetJ.A. (1978). Characteristics of written expression of learning disabled and non-learning disabled elementary school students. Muncie, IN: Ball State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 159 465)
36.
RaskindM.H. (1994). Assistive technology for adults with learning disabilities: A rationale for use. In GerberJ.ReiffH.B. (Eds.), Learning disabilities in adulthood: Persisting problems and evolving issues (pp. 152–162). Boston, MA: Andover Medical Publishers.
37.
RaskindM.H.ScottN. (1993). Technology for college students with learning disabilities. In VogelS.A.AdelmanP. (Eds.), Success for postsecondary students with learning disabilities (pp. 240–280). New York: Springer-Verlag.
38.
ReedD.W. (1958). Linguistic atlas of the Pacific Coast. Berkeley: University of California.
39.
ReedD.W. (1971). Eastern dialect words in California. In AllenH.B.UnderwoodG.N. (Eds.), Readings in American dialectology (pp. 105–114). New York: Appleton Century Crofts.
40.
ScardamaliaM.BereiterC.GoelmanH. (1982). The role of production factors in writing ability. In NystrandM. (Ed.), What writers know. The language, process and structure of written discourse (pp. 173–210). New York: Academic Press.
41.
The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504, PL 93–112. Federal Register, May 4, 1977.
42.
ThomasC.C.EnglertC.S.GreggS. (1987). An analysis of errors and strategies in expository writing of learning disabled students. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 21–46.
43.
VogelS.A. (1985). Syntactic complexity in written expression of LD college writers. Annals of Dyslexia, XXXV, 137–157.
44.
VogelS.A.MoranM. (1982). Written language disorders in learning disabled college students: A preliminary report. In CruickshankW.LernerJ. (Eds.) Coming of age: The best of ACLD, Vol. III (pp. 212–225). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
45.
WechslerD. (1981). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. New York: Psychological Corporation.
46.
WilsonL. (1963). A study of some influencing factors upon and the nature of young children's written language. Journal of Experimental Education, 31, 371–380.
