Compensatory Effectiveness of Speech Recognition on the Written Composition Performance of Postsecondary Students with Learning Disabilities

Abstract

Seventeen males and twelve females wrote essays under three conditions: (a) without assistance; (b) using a human transcriber; and (c) using a speech recognition system. Students received higher holistic scores using speech recognition than when writing without assistance at a statistically significant level ( p=.048). In order to determine the reasons for the superior scores on the essays written using speech recognition, 22 measures of fluency, vocabulary and syntax were computed. Several measures showed a strong correlation with the holistic score. A multiple regression revealed that the best predictor of the holistic score was Words with Seven or More Letters. Further, the ratio of Words with Seven or More Letters to Total Words differed significantly across conditions ( p=.0136), in favor of speech recognition, when compared with receiving no assistance. A factor analysis identified three factors that accounted for significant variation in holistic score: Factor 1, measures related to length of the essay ( p=.0001+); Factor 2, measures of morphological complexity ( p=.003); and Factor 3, main verbs ( p=.021). The authors suggest that the technology may have been successful because it “encouraged” the use of longer words, a powerful predictor of a holistic score.

Using Speech Recognition Software to Increase Writing Fluency for Individuals with Physical Disabilities

“…Instead of relying on another person, speech recognition systems take the burden off of using human transcribers and allow students to independently dictate work (Higgins & Raskind, 1995). Hux, Rankin-Erickson, Manasse, and Lauritzen, (2000) and Rosen and Yampolsky (2000) discussed that due to motor constraints, the hands-free speech recognition system is attractive.…”

“…A number of studies indicated the importance or rehearsal and planning prior to composing using dictation (De La Paz & Graham, 1997;Higgins & Raskind 1995;Wetzel, 1996) because participants in these studies improved writing skills through dictation only when planning first. In the studies, all students with learning disabilities had difficulty handwriting, spelling, punctuating, and with rate of production.…”

“…Therefore, Reece and Cumming stated that using the listening word processor, the writer does not need to utilize high levels of working memory to compose and can therefore concentrate on the higher level aspect of composing. Higgins and Raskind (1995) compared discrete speech recognition to handwriting and dictation to a human transcriber for college students with learning disabilities.…”

“…The literature also reports several drawbacks to speech recognition systems, including the amount of training and the inaccuracy of the word recognition. Higgins and Raskind (1995) reported that students spent an average of six hours of training on the speech recognition software.…”

Breaking the hype cycle: Using the computer effectively with learners with intellectual disabilities

“…For example, in classrooms where teachers had very little experience with software the computer would be used for 'educational' games that had little to do with the overall language program. Higgins and Raskind (1995) and Wepner (2004) have argued that the literature has overemphasised the technical concerns such as graphics and sound, to the detriment of addressing educational concerns about content, processes and opportunities for learning.…”