This article reviews the ways that computers can support writing by students with learning disabilities, with an emphasis on applications that go beyond word processing. Following an overview of research on word processing is a discussion of software that assists with the basic processes of transcription and sentence generation, including spelling checkers, speech synthesis, word prediction, and grammar and style checkers. Next, applications that support the cognitive processes of planning are reviewed, including prompting programs, outlining and semantic mapping software, and multimedia applications. Finally, the use of computer networks to support collaboration and communication with diverse audiences is addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bahr, C.M. Nelson, N.W. & Van Meter, A. (1994). Planning to write: Comparison of a text-based versus a graphics-based tool. Manuscript submitted for publication.
2.
Bangert-Drowns, R.L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 69–93.
3.
Becker, H.J. (1993). Teaching with and about computers in secondary schools. Communications of the ACM, 36(5), 69–72.
4.
Borgh, K., & Dickson, W.P. (1992). The effects on children's writing of adding speech synthesis to a word processor. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24, 533–544.
5.
Calkins, L.M. (1991). Living between the lines.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6.
Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Word processing and writing in elementary class rooms: A critical review of related literature. Review of Educational Research, 61, 107–155.
7.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt Learning Technology Center. (1993). Integrated media: Toward a theoretical framework for utilizing their potential. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12(2), 71–85.
8.
Cohen, M., & Riel, M.M. (1989). The effect of distant audiences on students' writing. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 143–159.
9.
Co:Writer [Computer program]. (1992). Wauconda, IL: Don Johnston Developmental Equipment.
10.
Daiute, C. (1986a). Physical and cognitive factors in revising: Insights from studies with computers. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 141–159.
11.
Daiute, C. (1986b). Do 1 and 1 make 2? Patterns of influence by collaborative authors. Written Communication, 3, 382–408.
12.
Daiute, C. (1992). Multimedia composing: Extending the resources of kindergarten to writers across the grades. Language Arts, 69, 250–260.
13.
Dalton, B.M. (1988). A comparative study of five spell checkers' analyses of learning disabled and normally achieving fourth grade students' written compositions. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, MA.
14.
Dalton, B., Winbury, N., & Morocco, C. C. (1990). “If you could just push a button”: Two fourth-grade boys with learning disabilities learn to use a computer spelling checker. Journal of Special Education Technology, 10, 177–191.
15.
DECtalk [Computer hardware]. (no date). Maynard, MA: Digital Equipment Corp.
16.
Emerson & Stern Associates. (1992). Write This Way [Computer program]. Petaluma, CA: Interactive Learning Materials.
17.
Englert, C.S., Raphael, T.E., Anderson, L.M., Anthony, H.M., & Stevens, D.D. (1991). Making writing strategies and self-talk visible: Cognitive strategy instruction in writing in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 337–372.
18.
Englert, C.S., Raphael, T.E., Anderson, L.M., Gregg, S.L., & Anthony, H.M. (1989). Exposition: Reading, writing, and the metacognitive knowledge of learning disabled students. Learning Disabilities Research, 5, 5–24.
19.
Fitzgerald, J. (1987). Research on revision in writing. Review of Educational Research, 57, 481–506.
20.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J.R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387.
21.
Garner, R., Alexander, P.A., & Hare, V.C. (1991). Reading comprehension failure in children. In B.Y.L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (pp. 284–307). San Diego: Academic Press.
22.
Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students' compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 781–791.
23.
Graham, S., Harris, K., MacArthur, C.A., & Schwartz, S.S. (1991). Writing and writing instruction with students with learning disabilities: A review of a program of research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 89–114.
24.
Graham, S., & MacArthur, C. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training. The Journal of Special Education, 22, 133–152.
25.
Hasselbring, T., & Goin, L. (1991). Enhancing writing through integrated media. The Writing Notebook, 9(1), 27–29.
26.
Hidi, S., & Hildyard, A. (1983). The comparison of oral and written productions of two discourse types. Discourse Processes, 6, 91–105.
27.
King, M.L., & Rentel, V.M. (1981). Research update: Conveying meaning in written texts. Language Arts, 58, 721–728.
28.
Kinzer, C.K., Hasselbring, T.S., Schmidt, C.A., & Meltzer, L. (1990, April). Effects of multimedia to enhance writing ability.Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
29.
MacArthur, C.A. (1988). The impact of computers on the writing process. Exceptional Children, 54, 536–542.
30.
MacArthur, C.A. (1994). [Review of a grammar checker designed for students with learning disabilities]. Unpublished raw data.
31.
MacArthur, C.A., & Graham, S. (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.
32.
MacArthur, C.A., Graham, S., Haynes, J.A., & De La Paz, S. (in press). Spelling checkers and students with learning disabilities: Performance comparisons and impact on spelling. The Journal of Special Education.
33.
MacArthur, C.A., Graham, S., & Schwartz, S. (1991). Knowledge of revision and revising behavior among learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14, 61–73.
34.
MacArthur, C.A., Graham, S., & Schwartz, S.S. (1993). Integrating word processing and strategy instruction into a process approach to writing. School Psychology Review, 22, 671–681.
35.
MacArthur, C.A., Schwartz, S.S., & Graham, S. (1991). Effects of a reciprocal peer revision strategy in special education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 201–210.
36.
Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D.R. (1987). Comparison of speech synthesis intelligibility with listeners from three age groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 120–128.
37.
Mitton, R. (1987). Spelling checkers, spelling correctors and the misspellings of poor spellers. Information Processing and Management, 23, 495–505.
38.
Montague, M., Graves, A., & Leavell, A. (1991). Planning, procedural facilitation, and narrative composition of junior high students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 219–224.
39.
Morocco, C., Dalton, B., & Tivnan, T. (1990, April). The impact of computer-supported writing instruction on the writing quality of 4th grade students with learning disabilities.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
40.
Morocco, C.C., & Neuman, S.B. (1986). Word processors and the acquisition of writing strategies. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 243–247.
41.
Peyton, J.K., & Batson, T. (1986). Computer networking: Making connections between speech and writing. ERIC/CLL News Bulletin, 10(1), 5–7.
42.
Riel, M.M. (1985). The computer chronicles newswire: A functional learning environment for acquiring literacy skills. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 317–337.
43.
Rosegrant, T.J. (1986, April). It doesn't sound right: The role of speech output as a primary form of feedback for beginning text revision. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
44.
Salomon, G. (1992, February). Metacognitive facilitation and cultivation during essay writing: The case of the “Writing Partner.”Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Cognitive Education, Riverside, CA.
45.
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Goelman, H. (1982). The role of production factors in writing ability. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 173–210). New York: Academic Press.
46.
Stoddard, B., & MacArthur, C.A. (1993). A peer editor strategy: Guiding learning disabled students in response and revision. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 76–103.
