Eleven learning handicapped students generated text at microcomputers both alone and as members of dyads. Examination of mechanical errors made under these two conditions revealed a lower error rate in the dyad condition. Three alternative hypotheses were offered to explain dyad performance: (1) better performing partners dominated the writing process; (2) participants self-monitored and requested assistance from their partners; or (3) participants monitored input of their partners and offered assistance. Support for all three hypotheses was found. Transcripts of the social interactions revealed differential degrees of cooperative behavior and involvement in the writing task among the learning handicapped students. The microcomputer proved to be useful as a context for writing in that the “public,” on-screen availability of the text enabled participation by both members of the dyad in text generation and editing. The relationship between error monitoring and the social interaction needed for collaboration is also discussed. The evidence supports the use of collaboration on writing activities at microcomputers to elicit editing and monitoring behaviors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bartlett, E.J. (1982). Learning to revise: Some component processes. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 345–363). New York: Academic Press.
Bridwell-Bowles, L. (1987). Writing with computers: Implications from research for the language impaired. Topics in Language Disorders, 7(4), 78–85.
4.
Brown, A.L. (1986). The role of metacognition in reading and studying. In J. Orasanu (Ed.), Reading comprehension: From research to practice (pp. 49–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
Cosden, M.A., Goldman, S.R., & Hine, M.S. (1989, March). Learning handicapped students' interactions during a microcomputer-based group writing activity (Tech. Rep. No. 57). Santa Barbara: University of California, Project TEECh.
6.
Dickinson, D.K. (1986). Cooperation, collaboration, and a computer: Integrating a computer into a first-second grade writing program. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 357–379.
Forman, E.A., & Cazden, C.B. (1986). Exploring Vygotskian perspectives in education: The cognitive value of peer interaction. In J.W. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 323–347). New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Goldman, S.R., Cosden, M.A., & Hine, M.S. (1988, June). Microcomputer-based collaborative writing by learning handicapped students: Cognitive characteristics (Tech. Rep. No. 55). Santa Barbara: University of California, Project TEECh.
10.
Goldman, S.R., & Rueda, R. (1988). Developing writing skills in bilingual exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 54, 543–551.
11.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. (1988). Instructional recommendations for teaching writing to exceptional students. Exceptional Children, 54, 543–551.
12.
Heap, J.L. (1987, April). Organizational features of collaborative editing activities at a computer. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C.
13.
Levin, J.A., Riel, M.M., Rowe, R.D., & Boruta, M.J. (1985). Muktuk meets jacuzzi: Computer networks and elementary school writers. In S.W. Freedman (Ed.), The acquisition of written language: Response and revision (pp. 160–171). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
14.
Lloyd, J., Crawley, E.P., Kohler, F., & Strain, P. (1988). Redefining the applied research agenda: Cooperative learning, prereferral, teacher consultation, and peer-mediated interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 43–52.
15.
Loper, A.B., & Murphy, D.M. (1985). Cognitive self-regulatory training for underachieving children. In D.L. Forrest-Pressley, G.E. McKinnon, & T.G. Walker (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. 2, pp. 223–265). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
16.
MacArthur, C.A. (1988). The impact of computers on the writing process. Exceptional Children, 54, 363–370.
17.
MacArthur, C., & Graham, S. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing and dictation. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 22–42.
18.
Madden, N., & Slavin, R. (1983). Effects of cooperative learning on the social acceptance of mainstreamed academically handicapped students. The Journal of Special Education, 17, 171–182.
19.
Matsuhashi, A., & Gordon, E. (1985). Revision, addition, and the power of the unseen text. In S.W. Freedman (Ed.), The acquisition of written language: Response and revision (pp. 226–249). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Slavin, R., Leavey, M., & Madden, N. (1984). Combining cooperative learning and individualized instruction: Effects on student mathematics achievement, attitudes, and behaviors. Elementary School Journal, 84, 410–422.
22.
Torgesen, J.K. (1977). The role of nonspecific factors in the task performance of learning disabled children: A theoretical assessment. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 10, 33–39.
23.
Torgesen, J.K. (1982). The learning disabled child as an inactive learner: Educational implications. Topics in Learning & Learning Disabilities, 2, 45–52.
24.
Webb, N.M. (1982). Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 642–655.
25.
Wong, B.Y.L. (1985). Metacognition and learning disabilities. In D.L. Forrest-Pressley, G.E. MacKinnon, T.G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance, Vol. 2 (pp. 137–180). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
26.
Wong, B.Y.L. (1986). Metacognition and special education: A review of a view. The Journal of Special Education, 20, 9–29.
