Ten hearing-impaired teenagers used a word processor based on the UCSD PASCAL system in order to test the feasibility of word processing for students with poor writing skills. The word processor can provide a highly motivating environment for students to revise and develop manuscripts. Preliminary investigation showed that the students had little difficulty in learning to operate the computer, but limited their revision mainly to correcting grammatical errors in their first drafts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FlowerL. S. and HayesJ. R., Problem-Solving Strategies and the Writing Process, College English, 39, pp. 449–461, 1977.
2.
GravesD. H., Balance the Basics: Let Children Write, Ford Foundation, New York, 1978.
3.
GouldJ. D., Experiment on Composing Letters: Some Facts, Some Myths, and Some Experiments, in Cognitive Processes in Writing, GreggL. W. and SteinbergE. R., (eds.), Lawrence Erbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1980.
4.
StallardC. K., An Analysis of the Writing Behavior of Good Student Writers, Research in the Teaching of English, 8, pp. 206–218, 1974.
5.
HendersonM. E., The Composing Process of Prospective Elementary Teachers: Implications for a Treatment Program for the Poor Writer, Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, p. 2424a, 1980.
6.
CalkinsL. M., The Craft of Writing, Teacher, 98: 4, pp. 40–44, 1980.
7.
FraseL., Computer Aids for Writing and Text Design, symposium presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention, Los Angeles, April, 1981.
8.
CollinsA. and GentnerD., A Framework for a Cognitive Theory of Writing, in Cognitive Processes in Writing, GreggL. W. and SteinbergE. R. (eds.), Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1980.
9.
SommersN., Revision Experience of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers, College Composition and Communication, 30, pp. 46–49, 1979.
10.
HenningsD. G., Enter the Word-Processing Computer, Language Arts, 58, pp. 18–22, 1981.
11.
TrybusR. J. and KarchmerM. A., School Achievement Scores of Hearing Impaired Children: National Data on Achievement Status and Growth Patterns, American Annals of the Deaf, 122, pp. 62–69, 1977.
12.
CharrowV., Deaf English-An Investigation of the Written English Competence of Deaf Adolescents, Technical Report No. 236, Stanford University, 1974 (ERIC Document No. ED 105 668).
13.
WilburR. B. and QuigleyS. P., Syntactic Structures in the Written Language of Deaf Children, The Volta Review, 77, pp. 194–203, 1975.
14.
GeoffrionL. D. and SchusterK. E., Auditory Handicaps and Reading: An Annotated Bibliography, International Reading Association, Newark, Delaware, 1979.
15.
HoemannH. W.AndrewsC. E.FlorianV. A.HoemannS. A. and JensemaC. J., The Spelling Proficiency of Deaf Students, American Annals of the Deaf, 121, pp. 489–493, 1976.
16.
BridwellL. S., Revising Strategies in Twelfth Grade Students' Transactional Writing, Research in the Teaching of English, 14, pp. 197–222, 1980.
17.
GeoffrionL. D. and BlakelyM., A Writing Program for Hearing-Impaired Teenagers, paper presented at the Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf, Rochester, New York, June 1981.
18.
GormleyK. A. and FranzenA. M., Why Can't the Deaf Read? Comments on Asking the Wrong Question, American Annals of the Deaf, 123, pp. 542–547, 1981.
19.
GeoffrionL. D. and GoldenbergE. P., Computer-Based Exploratory Learning Systems for Communication Handicapped Children, Journal of Special Education, 15, pp. 325–332, 1981.
20.
CardS. K.MoranT. P. and NewellA., Computer Text-Editing: An Information-Processing Analysis of a Routine Cognitive Skills, Cognitive Psychology, 12, pp. 32–74, 1980.
