This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Vaughn, S. Articles by Gordon, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vaughn, S. Articles by Gordon, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Which Motoric Condition Is Most Effective for Teaching Spelling to Students With and Without Learning Disabilities?

Sharon Vaughn received her PhD from the University of Arizona. She is presently a professor in the departments of Teaching and Learning and Psychology, University of Miami.

Jeanne Shay Schumm

Jeanne Shay Schumm received her PhD from the University of Miami. She is an assistant professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning at the University of Miami.

Jane Gordon

Jane Gordon received her PhD from the University of Miami. She is an assistant professor in the Department of Teacher Education at Eastern Michigan University. Address: Sharon Vaughn, University of Miami, School of Education, PO Box 248065, Coral Gables, FL 33124-2043.

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of three motoric conditions (writing, tracing, and computer keyboarding) on the spelling performance of 24 third- and fourth-grade students without learning disabilities (NLD) (15 males, 9 females) and 24 third- and fourth-grade students with learning disabilities (LD) (16 males, 8 females). This study applied empirically based procedures for teaching spelling, examined student performance over time, and incorporated student interviews concerning their preference for motoric condition. For number of words spelled and proportion of bi-grams (correct letter sequences) used correctly, significant differences were found between the LD and NLD groups, both at posttest and follow-up, with the NLD students learning to spell more words and apply more correct bi-grams than the students with LD. There was no significant effect for condition for either words spelled or bi-grams, indicating that students did not learn significantly more words in the writing, tracing, or computer condition. There was also a significant time effect indicating that the accuracy of both groups decreased over time from posttest to follow-up for both words and bi-grams. Interviews revealed that students in both groups preferred the computer condition; however, they believed that they learned best in the writing and tracing conditions.

Journal of Learning Disabilities, Vol. 26, No. 3, 191-198 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/002221949302600306


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. E. Kelman and K. Apel Effects of a Multiple Linguistic and Prescriptive Approach to Spelling Instruction: A Case Study Communication Disorders Quarterly, January 1, 2004; 25(2): 56 - 66. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. M. Fulk and M. Stormont-Spurgin SPELLING INTERVENTIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: A REVIEW Journal of Special Education, January 1, 1995; 28(4): 488 - 513. [Abstract] [PDF]