Computerized Instruction in Translation Strategies for Students in Upper Elementary and Middle School Grades with Persisting Learning Disabilities in Written Language

Autor/inn/en	Niedo, Jasmin; Tanimoto, Steve; Thompson, Robert H.; Abbott, Robert D.; Berninger, Virginia W.
Titel	Computerized Instruction in Translation Strategies for Students in Upper Elementary and Middle School Grades with Persisting Learning Disabilities in Written Language
Quelle	In: Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21 (2016) 2, S.14-30 (17 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1046-6819
DOI	10.18666/LDMJ-2016-V21-I2-7751
Schlagwörter	Elementary School Students; Middle School Students; Learning Disabilities; Statistical Analysis; Personal Narratives; Diagnostic Tests; Translation; Computer Assisted Instruction; Sentences; Reading Comprehension; Reading Writing Relationship; Handwriting; Spelling; Hypothesis Testing + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Middle school; Middle schools; Student; Students; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Schüler; Schülerin; Learning handicap; Lernbehinderung; Statistische Analyse; Erlebniserzählung; Diagnostic test; Diagnostischer Test; Computer based training; Computerunterstützter Unterricht; Sentence analysis; Satzanalyse; Leseverstehen; Handschrift; Schreibweise; Hypothesenprüfung; Hypothesentest
Abstract	Students in grades 5 to 9 (ages 10 to 14; 6 girls, 27 boys) who had persisting specific learning disabilities in transcription (handwriting and spelling) completed three kinds of composition tasks requiring translation (thought to written language) on iPads using alternating transcription modes (stylus or keyboard) across every three lessons: personal narratives (6 lessons) and written summaries about read source material (integrated reading-writing) and heard source material (integrated listening-writing) (12 lessons). Before composing summaries, students clicked sequentially one at a time onto translation strategies, which they read and heard through earphones, and could click on again as needed during summary writing: (a) Level I composing of the very next sentence, and (b) Level II composing of a higher-level discourse structure. ANOVAs showed that Level I strategies were used significantly more often than Level II strategies; but the main effect for transcription mode was not significant. Written summaries of read source material had more errors in main ideas and factual details than heard source materials, but not more irrelevant statements. Applications of results are discussed for using computers for writing instruction, not just accommodations, for students with persisting transcription disabilities. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Sagamore Publishing LLC. 1807 North Federal Drive, Urbana, IL 61801. Tel: 800-327-5557; Tel: 217-359-5940; Fax: 217-359-5975; e-mail: journals@sagamorepub.com; Web site: http://js.sagamorepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01