電腦輸入對國中學習障礙學生寫作表現之研究

• Main Author: 曾于倫
• Other Authors: 洪儷瑜
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2005
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/99151562148868037769

碩士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 特殊教育學系在職進修碩士班 === 93 === The study takes the method of Alternative Treatment Design（ATD）of single-subject design. It aims to compare the writing performance and writing attitudes of two computer input devices (i.e. keyboard inputdevices: word processingperformance and writing attitudes ofjunior high school students with learning disabilities. The examinees are identified to have suffered from learning disability andwriting problems by the Committee of Identification Placement and Consultation for the Special Needs Children in Taichung City. The five participants with learning disabilities and writing problems wrote nine compositions through typing、using CVRS, and handwriting alternatively. And and Chinese Voice Recognition System ,CVRS) and handwriting. The five junior high school students with learning disabilities serve as the subjects, who are identified as learning disability and suffer with writing problems by the Committee of Identification Placement and Consultation for the Special Needs Children in Taichung City. The nine compositions through typing、using CVRS, and handwriting alternatively are designed with counterbalance to collect LD students’ writing . The writings are scored as fluency、vocabulary、syntax、writing conventions、content and quality. The students’ attitudes toward writing are reported after each writing session. The visual analysis and the Wilcoxon Matched Pairs Signed-Ranks Tests are taken to analyze the data. The major findings of this study are as follow: 1. Participants are more likely to be affected by personal factors in terms of the total number of vocabulary、the Corrected Type-Token Ratio (CTTR)、mature words、contents, and quality; there is no consistent result of the three input devices. 2. The proportion of grammatically accurate sentences by CVRS writing is apparently higher than that by handwriting and typing. 3. Both computer-input writing: typing input and sound input, can effectively raise the proportion of correct words produced by participants. 4. Computer writing does not necessarily affect the participants’ attitudes towards writing; it may depend on personal characters. According to the findings above, the study also combines the conclusions and limitations to provide advice for practical teaching and future studies.