Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 111-117 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Asia Pacific Journal of Speech Language and Hearing |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - 2008 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Written language intervention approaches : A brief review. / Gillian, Edward; McAllister, Lindy; McLeod, Sharynne; Parkes, Robert J.
In: Asia Pacific Journal of Speech Language and Hearing, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2008, p. 111-117.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Written language intervention approaches
T2 - A brief review
AU - Gillian, Edward
AU - McAllister, Lindy
AU - McLeod, Sharynne
AU - Parkes, Robert J.
N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: Journal title (773t) = Asia Pacific Journal of Speech Language and Hearing. ISSNs: 1361-3286;
PY - 2008
Y1 - 2008
N2 - SLPs working in schools are often asked to work on oral and written language of children with communication impairments. This paper discusses evidence for three major approaches to written language intervention: traditional pen and paper intervention and two different types of computer based learning (CBL). The traditional pen and paper intervention has been found to be successful when it incorporates language-based and explicit instruction; however, difficulties with spelling and legibility can decrease its effectiveness. The word processing software approach has a small body of supporting evidence; however, it does not provide explicit scaffolding for the development of vocabulary and punctuation. Writing prompt software has a small body of evidence supporting its effectiveness. More research into the use of writing prompt software for written language intervention is recommended.
AB - SLPs working in schools are often asked to work on oral and written language of children with communication impairments. This paper discusses evidence for three major approaches to written language intervention: traditional pen and paper intervention and two different types of computer based learning (CBL). The traditional pen and paper intervention has been found to be successful when it incorporates language-based and explicit instruction; however, difficulties with spelling and legibility can decrease its effectiveness. The word processing software approach has a small body of supporting evidence; however, it does not provide explicit scaffolding for the development of vocabulary and punctuation. Writing prompt software has a small body of evidence supporting its effectiveness. More research into the use of writing prompt software for written language intervention is recommended.
KW - Computer based learning
KW - Schools
KW - Written language intervention
M3 - Article
VL - 11
SP - 111
EP - 117
JO - Asia Pacific Journal of Speech Language and Hearing
JF - Asia Pacific Journal of Speech Language and Hearing
SN - 1361-3286
IS - 2
ER -