Effectiveness of a Computer Skills Program to Improve Written Communication in Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Word processing using a keyboard is an option for children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) who have printing/ handwriting difficulties. A five-replication single-subject ABA design was used to explore the ability of 6 children with DCD (entering Grades 3-5) experiencing problems with printing/handwriting to learn computer skills. Following a two-week intervention all children were familiar with basic computer functions and showed improved word processing skills. Touch-keyboarding speed increased for the five children entering Grades 4-5, but only one child acquired a speed (letters/minute) comparable to printing/ handwriting. Four children demonstrated increased text production when generating a story, but none achieved speeds comparable to printing/handwriting. Five-finger touch-keyboarding proficiency was better for children in Grades 4-5. Therapists observed improved legibility and increased motivation. Results suggest that the child's grade, program support, and program length should be considered when making decisions about keyboarding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".