Bahr C M, Nelson N W, Van Meter A M
Department of Special Education, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo 49008, USA.
J Learn Disabil. 1996 Jul;29(4):355-70. doi: 10.1177/002221949602900404.
This article describes a research study comparing the effects of two computer-based writing tools on the story-writing skills of fourth-through eighth-grade students with language-related learning disabilities. The first tool, the prompted writing feature of FrEdWriter (Rogers, 1985), allowed students to answer story grammar questions, then type stories using those responses as the plan; the second tool, Once Upon a Time (Urban, Rushing, & Star, 1990), allowed students to create graphic scenes, then type stories about those scenes. Nine students attended a series of after-school writing labs twice weekly for 11 weeks, using each tool for half of the writing sessions. Group results did not clearly favor either tool; however, individual differences suggested that use of planning features should be linked to student needs. Students who had less internal organizational ability benefited from the computer-presented story grammar prompts and wrote less mature stories when using the graphics-based tool. Students with relatively strong organizational skills wrote more mature stories with the graphics-based tool.
本文描述了一项研究,比较了两种基于计算机的写作工具对四至八年级有语言相关学习障碍学生故事写作技能的影响。第一种工具是FrEdWriter的提示写作功能(罗杰斯,1985年),它允许学生回答故事语法问题,然后将这些回答作为写作计划来撰写故事;第二种工具是《从前》(厄本、拉辛和斯塔,1990年),它允许学生创建图形场景,然后围绕这些场景撰写故事。九名学生每周两次参加一系列为期11周的课后写作实验室,在一半的写作课程中使用每种工具。小组结果并没有明显偏向于任何一种工具;然而,个体差异表明,计划功能的使用应与学生需求相联系。内部组织能力较弱的学生受益于计算机呈现的故事语法提示,使用基于图形的工具时写出的故事不太成熟。组织能力相对较强的学生使用基于图形的工具写出的故事更成熟。