An adolescent student with fetal alcohol effect and learning disabilities: Tutoring in written language.

Word prompt programs are computer software programs or program features that are used in addition to basic word processing. These programs provide word lists from which a user selects a desired word and inserts it into a line of text. This software is used to support individuals with severe speech, physical, and learning disabilities. This tutorial describes the features of a variety of word prompt programs and reviews the current literature on the use of these programs by people with oral and written language needs. In addition, a matrix that identifies the features contained in eight sample word prompt programs is provided. The descriptions of features and the matrix are designed to assist speech-language pathologists and teachers in evaluating and selecting word prompt programs to support their clients' oral and written communication.

Download Full-text

Effects of Speech Synthesis on the Proofreading Efficiency of Postsecondary Students with Learning Disabilities

Learning Disability Quarterly ◽

10.2307/1511201 ◽

1995 ◽

Vol 18 (2) ◽

pp. 141-158 ◽

Cited By ~ 58

Author(s):

Marshall H. Raskind ◽

Eleanor Higgins

Keyword(s):

Learning Disabilities ◽

Speech Synthesis ◽

Written Language ◽

The Other ◽

Read Aloud ◽

Synthesis Condition ◽

Superior Performance ◽

Postsecondary Students ◽

Students With Learning Disabilities ◽

Synthesis System

This study investigated the effects of speech synthesis on the proofreading efficiency of postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Subjects proofread self-generated written language samples under three conditions: (a) using a speech synthesis system that simultaneously highlighted and “spoke” words on a computer monitor, (b) having the text read aloud to them by another person, and (c) receiving no assistance. Using the speech synthesis system enabled subjects to detect a significantly higher percentage of total errors than either of the other two proofreading conditions. In addition, subjects were able to locate a significantly higher percentage of capitalization, spelling, usage and typographical errors under the speech synthesis condition. However, having the text read aloud by another person significantly outperformed the other conditions in finding “grammar-mechanical” errors. Results are discussed with regard to underlying reasons for the overall superior performance of the speech synthesis system and the implications of using speech synthesis as a compensatory writing aid for postsecondary students with learning disabilities.

Download Full-text

Grammatical Verb Errors: Differences Between English Learners With and Without Diagnosed Language-Based Learning Disabilities

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools ◽

10.1044/2021_lshss-21-00003 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-11

Author(s):

Keisey Fumero ◽

Carla Wood

Keyword(s):

Learning Disabilities ◽

English Learners ◽

Progress Monitoring ◽

Written Language ◽

Fifth Grade ◽

Language Abilities ◽

Fifth Grade Students ◽

School Year ◽

Average Change ◽

Grammatical Accuracy

Purpose: This study examines the written language samples of fifth grade English learner (EL) students with and without diagnosed language-based learning disabilities (LLDs) in an effort to explore the utility of such supplemental materials for aiding in differential diagnosis of ELs with and without LLDs. Method: This sample of 127 fifth grade students consisted of ELs without identified disabilities ( n = 89) and ELs diagnosed with LLDs ( n = 38). Written language samples from a classroom-based expository writing task were coded for grammaticality and specific verb type of errors. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the groups that differed by language abilities was conducted at two time points to compare the frequency of errors and the average change in grammaticality from the beginning of the school year to the end of the school year. Results: EL students with and without LLDs performed similarly at the beginning of the school year. ELs without LLDs showed greater average change in accuracy across the school year. Significantly, higher proportions of verb tense and verb omission errors were demonstrated by ELs with LLDs when compared with their EL peers at the end of the school year. Overall grammatical accuracy was also lower for ELs with LLDs. Conclusions: Group differences at the end of the school year were confirmed in types and rate of verb errors. Results support the potential clinical utility of monitoring verb errors in writing samples over time as a supplemental tool in diagnostic evaluations and assessments for progress monitoring.

Download Full-text