A New Handwriting Scale

Freeman, Frank N.

doi:10.1086/459718

Cited by 28 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The figures in this paper illustrate some of the spatial features that have been previously considered in handwriting product evaluation scales, most of which include criteria such as letter size and slant, spacing between letters and words, the straightness of lines, letter forms and shapes and the general merit of the writing [8,26,49,[55][56][57]. Despite the years of study, many questions remain regarding which of these criteria constitute the critical components of handwriting readability and how these criteria can be measured [8,[58][59][60][61][62].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using data visualization and signal processing to characterize the handwriting process

Rosenblum

Chevion

Weiss

2006

Pediatric Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using data visualization and signal processing to characterize the handwriting process

Rosenblum

Chevion

Weiss

2006

Pediatric Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Groups differed significantly on the global-holistic evaluation of handwriting (WJ-III; Mather & Woodcock, 2001), with writers with dyslexia scoring lower, t(2, 128) = −3.505, p < .01. Due to concerns about the reliability of these scales for the adult population and to the fact that the scoring requires a time-consuming comparison to pregrade samples (limiting their practicality), we chose to use a second legibility scale developed for this research (Feldt, 1962;Freeman, 1959;Graham, 1982;Rosenblum et al, 2004). Group differences were not significant, however, on this in-house analytic legibility scale, t(2, 128) = −1.792, p < .08.…”

Section: Handwritingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Timed Essay Writing

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of high-stakes tests from elementary school through postsecondary education include the timed impromptu essay as a measure of writing performance. For adolescents with writing disorders, this type of evaluation often presents a significant barrier. The purpose of the current study was twofold. First, we investigated the influence of handwritten, typed, and typed/edited formats of an expository essay on the quality scores received by students with (n = 65) and without (n = 65) dyslexia. Second, we examined the contribution of spelling, handwriting, fluency, and vocabulary complexity to the quality scores that students with and without dyslexia received on the same writing task. Analyses indicated that vocabulary complexity, verbosity, spelling, and handwriting accounted for more variance in essay quality scores for writers with dyslexia than for their typically achieving peers. Both group and individual student outcomes are reported to better understand the needs of struggling writers with dyslexia. Implications for assessment, instruction, and accommodations are discussed with an eye toward reform efforts that target improved teaching and learning.

show abstract

“…This method was subsequently criticised because it did not discriminate as well among good as among poor writers (Erlbacher & Herrick, 1961). Later, Freeman (1959) aimed to broaden the preceding attempts by providing a scale for each grade level and then rating samples on general merit and legibility. The latter parameter was specified as comprising letter formation, alignment, size and slant.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Ziviani¹,

Elkins

1984

Educational Review

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The legibility components (letter formation, spacing, alignment and size) and speed of handwriting were assessed for 575 children in grades 3 to 7. Interrater reliabilities were high (·69 to ·97) and test-retest reliability over one week was lower for legibility (·44 to ·84) than for speed (·93). In general, reliabilities were higher for the older children. Correlations among legibility components ranged from ·46 to •76, though a principal factor analysis indicated that letter formation, spacing, alignment and size were discriminable elements of legibility. Correlations of legibility component scores with teacher ratings ranged between ·52 and ·76. Norms for speed were consistent with Groff's data and girls wrote significantly faster and smaller than boys. Girls also made fewer errors in letter formation than boys in grades 3, 4 and 5. Graphs indicating normative performance on the handwriting tasks were prepared.

show abstract

A New Handwriting Scale

Cited by 28 publications

References 0 publications

Using data visualization and signal processing to characterize the handwriting process

Using data visualization and signal processing to characterize the handwriting process

Timed Essay Writing

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About