THE MEASUREMENT OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES<sup>1</sup>

Helwig, John; Johns, John C.; Norman, James E.; Cooper, John O.

doi:10.1901/jaba.1976.9-231

Cited by 37 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such components as letter formation, alignment, spacing and size are arguably influential (Anderson, 1975;Fischer, 1964;Graig, 1966), yet few studies have followed up this point. Helwig, Johns, Norman & Cooper (1976) focused upon letter formation and devised a series of transparent overlays to evaluate students' reproductions of certain alphabetic letters. Independent observers' agreement on the measures was high (r = 0-89).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Ziviani¹,

Elkins

1984

Educational Review

106

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

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Ziviani¹,

Elkins

1984

Educational Review

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Speed has always been used as a performance measure in relation to writing (Ayres, 1912;Burt, 1921;Freeman, 1959;Grof, 1961;Gross et al, 1996;Peverly, 2006). Legibility was not assessed, as there does not seem to be any consensus about its evaluation as researchers such as Ayres (1912), Alston and Taylor (1984), Burt (1921), Freeman (1959), Feldt (1962, Gipps (1984), Helwig et al (1976), Rarick and Harris (1963), Rubin and Henderson (1982), Ziviani (1982) and Ziviani and Elkins (1984) have all proposed different ways to evaluate legibility.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments are reported with the aim of determining the effect of pen shape and size on two different types of task: drawing and writing. Experiment 1 attempted to determine the optimum shape and size of shank for ball-point pens used to perform an accurate drawing task. Twenty-seven participants used a total of nine different pens. Drawing performance was measured by having the subjects follow mazes of different size. The dependent variables were drawing movement time and drawing accuracy. The results indicate that the pen with an equivalent diameter of 8 mm had the best accuracy during drawing, even though it had the lowest speed. The results confirm the applicability and validity of the Drury tracking model for such a task. Even though users tended to prefer larger pens, their accuracy with such pens tended to be low.In a second experiment subjects performed a writing task (with no accuracy constraints) and rated their preference for types of pen. An attempt was made to determine the preferred dimensions of ball-point pens for writing in Chinese and English. A total of 36 "bare-bodied" pens and 20 Chinese subjects were used to evaluate the effects of shape, size and weight on time to write a sentence. The Writing ability, Comfort and an Overall rating were given by the subjects. The results indicate that the Chinese subjects preferred a circular shaped pen for writing in both languages. A factor analysis showed that speed, comfort and writing ability are independent parameters in pen evaluations.

show abstract

“…This assessment was administered to determine if students had the preskills to use the evaluative overlays (Helwig et al, 1976 Students were seen from two to five days per week during the period following their lunch. All sessions for teaching the use of the overlays were 15 to 20 min long and conducted outside the subjects' classroom in a room equipped with a chalkboard and appropriately sized tables and chairs.…”

Section: Subjects and Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following training, the experimenter measured 10 handwriting samples and 21 strokes each. The experimenter then compared the results with the samples from the original evaluation of the samples reported in the Helwig et al (1976) report. The range of agreement on these samples was 81 to 98%.…”

Section: Interobserver Agreement Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

TECHNICAL REPORT: STUDENTS' SELF‐RECORDING OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES¹

Jones

Trap

Cooper

1977

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A method to allow students to self-record manuscript letter strokes was applied to three groups of first-grade school children. These children learned to use plastic overlays in some 80 to 120 min, with agreement between students and experimenter concerning correctness averaging 79%, 82%/, and 84% in the three groups. A practical method allowing children to record their letter writing, thus receiving immediate feedback appears to have been demonstrated.

show abstract

THE MEASUREMENT OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES¹

Abstract: Incorrect letter formation contributes more to illegible handwriting than any other factor (Craig,

Cited by 37 publications

References 6 publications

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance

TECHNICAL REPORT: STUDENTS' SELF‐RECORDING OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

THE MEASUREMENT OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES1

Abstract: Incorrect letter formation contributes more to illegible handwriting than any other factor (Craig,

Cited by 37 publications

References 6 publications

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

An Evaluation of Handwriting Performance

Effects of pen design on drawing and writing performance

TECHNICAL REPORT: STUDENTS' SELF‐RECORDING OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

THE MEASUREMENT OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES¹

TECHNICAL REPORT: STUDENTS' SELF‐RECORDING OF MANUSCRIPT LETTER STROKES¹