No description available.

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 2007. / Title proper from title frame. Also available in printed format.

This study examined the effectiveness of two types of assistive technology for writing instruction of students with Down syndrome in British Columbia. Students received either Clicker 5, a symbol-supported writing software program; or Co:Writer, a word prediction software program designed to support written output. Data collection was conducted between January-June 2007 (Year 1) and October-May 2008 (Year 2). Clicker 5 was provided to 43 students in Year 1 (17 of whom also participated in the study during Year 2) and was designed to support early and emergent literacy development. Co:Writer was provided to 18 students in Year 1 (2 of whom also participated in the study during Year 2) and was designed to support text writing. Each month during both school years, teachers were asked to complete an on-line survey with questions related to their impressions of the impact of the technology and other variables. Students in the Clicker group produced 10-minute monthly writing samples about a selected topic using a Clicker grid designed by the research team. Students in the Co:Writer group produced one handwritten and one Co:Writer-supported 10-minute writing sample every month about the specified topic. Data were analyzed with regard to writing rate, spelling accuracy (Co:Writer group only), and quality (measured both analytically and holistically). Results for dependent measures of writing for the Clicker group were variable but provided some support for the use of symbol-supported writing software for producing meaningful written output. The Co:Writer group was more accurate with regard to spelling and grammar while using Co:Writer compared to handwriting. The results are discussed in terms of the practical implications, limitations, and areas for future research.

A forced choice reaction time (RT) task was used to assess developmental changes in filtering and the related ability to narrow the focus of the attentional lens among persons with autism as compared to a group of typically developing children matched on different standardized measures. The participants included 35 persons with autism (CAs between 8.3 and 13.2 years, M = 9.8 years) and 35 typically developing children (CAs between 4.8 and 7.3 years, M = 5.9 years) between the mental ages (MA) of 5 and 8 years. The measures used for matching include the Leiter International Performance Scale - Revised (Leiter-R; Roid and Miller, 1997), the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Third Edition (PPVT-III; Dunn and Dunn, 1997), and the Expressive One Word Vocabulary Test (EOWVT; Gardner, 1990). The conditions varied with regard to the presence or absence of distractors, their proximity (none, close, and far) to a target stimulus, and the presence or absence of a visual window within which the target stimulus was presented. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

The development of numerical skills in children with Down syndrome is an area of research that has been neglected in the literature despite overwhelming evidence of its importance, both pedagogically, and for everyday functioning. The present study examines two important sub-skills of numeracy. Twelve boys with Down syndrome were compared to 24 typically developing boys (matched on verbal mental age and on chronological age) on two novel, computerized tasks designed to measure sequential processing and counting. Boys with Down syndrome performed comparably to both groups of typically matched controls on the sequential task. However, differences emerged when boys with Down syndrome were required to point and attribute meaning to each step on the counting task. These findings offer novel insights into the development of number skills and provide important data that can aid in the creation of syndrome-specific education strategies to maximize the potential of children with Down syndrome.

No description available.

This study examined the effectiveness of two types of assistive technology for writing instruction of students with Down syndrome in British Columbia. Students received either Clicker 5, a symbol-supported writing software program; or Co:Writer, a word prediction software program designed to support written output. Data collection was conducted between January-June 2007 (Year 1) and October-May 2008 (Year 2). Clicker 5 was provided to 43 students in Year 1 (17 of whom also participated in the study during Year 2) and was designed to support early and emergent literacy development. Co:Writer was provided to 18 students in Year 1 (2 of whom also participated in the study during Year 2) and was designed to support text writing. Each month during both school years, teachers were asked to complete an on-line survey with questions related to their impressions of the impact of the technology and other variables. Students in the Clicker group produced 10-minute monthly writing samples about a selected topic using a Clicker grid designed by the research team. Students in the Co:Writer group produced one handwritten and one Co:Writer-supported 10-minute writing sample every month about the specified topic. Data were analyzed with regard to writing rate, spelling accuracy (Co:Writer group only), and quality (measured both analytically and holistically). Results for dependent measures of writing for the Clicker group were variable but provided some support for the use of symbol-supported writing software for producing meaningful written output. The Co:Writer group was more accurate with regard to spelling and grammar while using Co:Writer compared to handwriting. The results are discussed in terms of the practical implications, limitations, and areas for future research.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 93-94).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 1976.

Thesis (M.S.)--Oregon State University, 2010. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the World Wide Web.