Real-Time Measurement of Writing in Measuring and Assessing Fluent Handwriting Skills and HandSpy as a Measurement Tool

Öz

The development of proficient writing skills is fundamentally rooted in writing fluency. Although the concept of fluency is frequently used in everyday discourse, it becomes apparent that there is no definitive technical definition or clear boundaries for measuring handwriting fluency. Typically, definitions of fluency are predicated on whether the writing exhibits clarity comparable to that a native speaker, with the volume of written output often serving as an indicator of fluency. Drawing upon literature, this study investigates the skill of fluent handwriting and the underlying components contributing to this proficiency, such as bursts and pauses. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the significance of real-time measurement in the assessment of fluent handwriting skills and, provides a brief overview of the HandSpy software utilized for these assessments. Therefore, as highlighted in this study, for all students, and to implement various strategies to achieve the desired proficiency level. Consequently, it can be asserted that the acquisition and development of fluent handwriting is not a skill that can be solely confined or concluded during initial literacy instruction. Accordingly, it is crucial to assess and monitor fluent handwriting through real-time measurements, as emphasized in this research, across all student populations, and to conduct different studies to ensure that the skill reaches the desired level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• fluent handwriting
• HandSpy
• measurement and evaluation
• real-time measurement in writing

Akıcı El Yazısı Yazma Becerisini Ölçme ve Değerlendirmede Yazmanın Gerçek Zamanlı Ölçümü ve Bir Ölçme Aracı Olarak HandSpy

Öz

Yetkin bir yazma becerisinin temelini yazmanın akıcı olması oluşturur. Akıcılık, günlük dilde sıklıkla kullanılmasına rağmen el yazısında akıcılık ele alındığında net bir teknik tanımlama ve ölçüm sınırının bulunmadığı görülür. Tanımlamalarda genel olarak yazının ana dilli konuşucusunun yazdığı netlikte olup olmamasından yola çıkılır ve bir yazı örneğindeki üretim miktarının akıcılık verisini sağladığı belirtilir. Alanyazında yer alan bu bilgilerden hareketle bu çalışmada akıcı el yazısı yazma becerisi ve bu beceriyi oluşturan bileşenlerin ne olduğu (patlamalar ve duraklamalar) incelenmiştir. Ayrıca akıcı el yazısı yazma becerisinin gerçek zamanlı ölçümünün neden önemli olduğu açıklanmaya çalışılmış ve bu ölçümlerde kullanılan HandSpy yazılımına ilişkin kısa bir bilgi verilmiştir. Sonuç olarak akıcı bir el yazısı becerisi edinmek ve geliştirmenin yalnızca ilk okuma-yazma eğitimiyle sınırlandırılamayacak ve sonlandırılamayacak bir beceri olduğu söylenebilir. Bu nedenle tüm öğrencilerde bu çalışmada da değinilen gerçek zamanlı ölçümler aracılığıyla akıcı el yazısı değerlendirmelerinin yapılması ve izlenmesi, becerinin istendik düzeye ulaşması için farklı çalışmaların yapılması önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akıcı el yazısı
• HandSpy
• ölçme ve değerlendirme
• yazmanın gerçek zamanlı ölçümü

Destekleyen Kurum

TÜBİTAK

Kaynakça

1. Alamargot, D., Dansac, C., Chesnet, D., & Fayol, M. (2007). Parallel processing before and after pauses: A combined analysis of graphomotor and eye movements during procedural text production. In M. Torrance, L. van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 13-29). Elsevier.
2. Alamargot, D., & Fayol, M. (2009). Modelling the development of written composition. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand & J. Riley (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Development (pp. 23-47). Sage Pub.
3. Alves, R. A., Castro, S. L., de Sousa, L., & Stromqvist, S. (2007). Influence of keyboarding skill on pause execution cycles in written composition. In Torrance, L. van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 55-65). Elsevier.
4. Alves, R. A., Castro, S. L., & Olive, T. (2008). Execution and pauses in writing narratives: Processing time, cognitive effort and typing skill. International Journal of Psychology, 43, 969-979.
5. Alves, R. A., & Limpo, T. (2015). Progress in written language bursts, pauses, transcription, and written composition across schooling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19(5), 374-391.
6. Alves, R. A., Limpo, T., Salas, N., & Joshi, R. M. (2018). Handwriting and spelling. In Steve Graham, Charles A. MacArthur & Michael A. Hebert (Eds.), Best Practices in Writing Instruction (pp.211-239). Guilford Press.
7. Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2012). Keystroke analysis: Reflections on procedures and measures. Written Communication, 29, 246–277.
8. Berman, R. (2014). Linguistic perspectives on writing development. In B. Arfe, J. Dockrell & V. Berninger (Ed.), Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia or oral language problems: Implications for assessment and instruction (pp. 176–186). Oxford University Press.

9. Berninger, V. W., & Winn, W. (2006). Implications of advancements in brain research and technology for writing develop ment, writing instruction, and educational evolution. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 96–114). Guilford Press.
10. Berninger, V.W. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 99-112.
11. Brand, M., & Brand, G. (2006). Practical fluency: Classroom perspectives, grades K-6. Stenhouse Pub.
12. Casanave, C. P. (2004). Controversies in second language writing: Dilemmas and decisions in research and instruction. University of Michigan Press.
13. Chanquoy, L., Foulin, J. N., & Fayol, M. (1990). Temporal management of short text writing by children and adults. European Bulletin of Cognitive Psychology, 10, 513-540.
14. Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18(1), 80-98.
15. Coker, J.R, D. L., Ritchey, K. D., Uribe-Zarain, X., & Jennings, A. S. (2017). An analysis of first-grade writing profiles and their relationship to compositional quality. Journal of Learning Disabilities,51(4), 336-350.
16. Dockrell, J. E., Connelly, V., & Arfè, B. (2019). Struggling writers in elementary school: Capturing drivers of performance. Learning and Instruction, 60, 75-84.
17. Fayol, M. (1999). From on-line management problems to strategies in written production. In M. Torrance & G. Jeffery (Eds.), Cognitive demands of writing. Processing capacity and working memory effects in text production (pp.13-24). Amsterdam University Press.
18. Graham, S., Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., & Whitaker, D. (1997). Role of mechanics in composing of elementary school students: A new methodological approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 170-182.
19. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3-12.
20. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 879-896.
21. Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A metaanalytic review. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27(9), 1703–1743.
22. Hariri, M., Ghonsooly, B., & Nemati, M. (2022). Investigating pausology of lower-intermediate and skilled efl learners’ writing and its relation to writing genres: a keystroke logging study. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers,13(1), 216-230.
23. Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written communication, 29(3), 369-388.
24. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Writing: An Interdisciplinary Approach (pp. 3-30). Lawrence Erlbaum Pub.
25. Hudson, R. F. (2002). Compositional fluency and spelling accuracy of second-grade students under six priming conditions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Florida.
26. Jacques, T., Silva, M., Camacho, A., & Alves, R. (2022). Using HandSpy 3.0 in Classrooms. Junior Researchers of EARLI (JURE) 2022 Conference, Porto, Portugal.
27. Janssen, D., van Waes, L., & van den Bergh H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 233-250). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Kaufer, D. S., Hayes J.R., & Flower L. (1986). Composing written sentences. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 121–140.
29. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141-165.
30. Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40, 387-417.
31. Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. E. (1994). Computer-aided protocol analysis of writing processes. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 26, 219-223.
32. Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Written language bursts mediate the relationship between transcription skills and writing performance. Written Communication, 34(3), 306-332.
33. Limpo, T., Alves, R. A., & Connelly, V. (2017). Examining the transcription writing link: Effects of handwriting fluency and spelling accuracy on writing performance via planning and translating in middle grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 53, 26-36.
34. Limpo, T., & Alves R. A. (2013). Modeling writing development: Contribution of transcription and self-regulation to Portuguese students’ text generation quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 401-413.
35. Maltepe, S. (2006). Türkçe öğretiminde yazılı anlatım uygulamaları için bir seçenek: yaratıcı yazma yaklaşımı. Dil Dergisi, 132, 56-66.
36. Matsuhashi, A. (1981). Pausing and planning: The tempo of written discourse production. Research in the Teaching of English, 15, 113-134.
37. McCutchen, D. (2000). Knowledge, processing, and working memory: Implications for a theory of writing. Educational Psychologist, 35, 13-23.
38. Medimorec, S., & Risko, E. F. (2017). Pauses in written composition: On the importance of where writers pause. Reading and Writing, 30, 1267–1285.
39. Monteiro, C., & Leal, J. (2013). Managing experiments on cognitive processes in writing with HandSpy. Computer Science and Information Systems, 10, 1747-1773.
40. Montgomery, D. (2007). Spelling, handwriting and dyslexia: Overcoming barriers to learning. Routledge.
41. Moors, A., & Houwer, J. D. (2007). What is automaticity? An analysis of its component features and their interrelations. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processess (pp. 11-50). Psychology Press.
42. Olive, T. (2004). Working memory in writing: Empirical evidence from the dual-task technique. European Psychologist, 9, 32-42.
43. Olive, T. (2010). Methods, techniques, and tools for the online study of the writing process. In Nathan L. Mertens (Ed.), Writing: Processes, Tools and Techniques (pp.1-18). Nova Science Publishers.
44. Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2002). Concurrent activation of high and low level production processes in written composition. Memory and Cognition, 30(4), 594–600.
45. Olive, T., Alves, R. A., & Castro, S. L. (2009). Cognitive processes in writing during pauses and execution periods. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 758-785.
46. Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (ss. 111-139). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
47. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning in College Students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385-407.
48. Polio, C. (2001). Research methodology in second language writing research: The case of text-based studies. In T. Silva & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.). On second language writing (pp. 91-115). Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Prunty, M. M., Barnett, A. L., Wilmut, K., & Plumb, M. S. (2014). An examination of writing pauses in the handwriting of children with Developmental Coordination Disorder. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(11), 2894-2905.
50. Roeser, J., De Maeyer, S., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2021). Modelling typing disfluencies as finite mixture process. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. Advance Online Publication.
51. Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2016). A comprehensive meta-analysis of handwriting instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 225–265.
52. Schilperoord, J. (1996). The distribution of pause time in written text production.In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 21–35). Amsterdam University Press.
53. Schilperoord, J. (2002). On the cognitive status of pauses in discourse production.In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp. 59-85). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
54. Schmidt, R. A. (1992). Psychological mechanism underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,14, 357-385.
55. Spelman Miller, K. (2000). Writing online: Temporal features of first and second language written text production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Reading.
56. Spelman Miller, K. (2006). Pausing, productivity and the processing of topic in online writing. In E. L. Sullivan (Ed.), Computer keystroke logging: Methods and applications (pp. 131-155). Elsevier.
57. Torrance, M., & Conijn, R. (2023). Methods for studying the writing time-course. Reading and Writing, 37.
58. Wengelin, A. (2002). Text production in adults with reading and writing difficulties (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Göteborg University.
59. Wengelin, A. (2006). Examining pauses in writing: Theory, methods and empirical data. In K. P. H. Sullivan & E. Lindgren (Eds.), Computer key-stroke logging: Methods and applications (pp. 107–130). Elsevier.
60. Wengelin, A. (2007). The word level focus in text production by adults with reading and writing difficulties. In M. Torrance, L. van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 67-82). Elsevier.
61. Wengelin, A., Torrance, M., Holmqvist, K., Simpson, S., Galbraith, D., Johansson, V., & Johansson, R. (2009). Combined eye tracking and keystroke-logging methods for studying cognitive processes in text production. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 337-351.
62. Xu, C., & Ding, Y. (2014). An exploratory study of pauses in computer-assisted EFL writing. Language Learning and Technology, 18, 80-96.
63. Xu, C., & Qi, Y. (2017). Analyzing pauses in computer-assisted EFL writing: A computer-keystroke-log perspective. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 20, 24-34.
64. Zutell, J., & Rasinski, T. V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students’ oral reading fluency. Theory Into Practice, 30, 211-217.