The Effects of Text-Based and Graphics-Based Software Tools on Planning and Organizing of Stories

Abstract

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.

Computer‐Based Graphic Organizers for Students with LD: A Systematic Review of Literature

“…However, Sturm and Rankin‐Erickson () found that computer mapping did not improve written expression when compared to a no‐mapping and hand‐mapping condition. In Bahr et al () despite slightly higher means for the story grammar mapping treatment, the single‐group design and small sample size make causality unclear. In summary, high effect sizes in social studies were identified on studies that included extensive teacher support regarding the information in the organizer that was subsequently studied by students.…”

“…The other treatment was a graphics‐based software program where students used clip‐art to generate pictures before writing, and then wrote to describe the scene they created. Students scored higher on narrative maturity, total written words, and complex sentences correct when using story grammar, and mean scores were identical for both treatments when simple correct sentences were measured (Bahr et al., ). Despite higher mean scores with the story grammar tool, the authors indicated that analysis of means for this small group revealed that the mean variances were not statistically significant.…”

“…Despite higher mean scores with the story grammar tool, the authors indicated that analysis of means for this small group revealed that the mean variances were not statistically significant. However, the authors suggested that students with weaker organization skills benefited more from the story grammar prompts (Bahr et al., ).…”

“…Results of the researcher‐implemented interventions found positive effects in one study (Unzueta & Barbetta, ) with high PND across all students. Two researcher‐led interventions were less effective for comprehension (Stetter & Hughes, ) and writing (Bahr et al., ).…”

Word Processing as an Assistive Technology Tool for Enhancing Academic Outcomes of Students with Writing Disabilities in the General Classroom

“…S tudents with learning disabilities (LD) experience significant difficulties with the writing process (Bahr, Nelson, & Van Meter, 1997;Newcomer & Barenbaum, 1991). A significant portion of school time (i.e., 30%-60%) is dedicated to various writing assignments (McHale & Cermak, 1992).…”