Handwriting in primary school: comparing standardized tests and evaluating impact of grapho-motor parameters

IF 2 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading and Writing Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1007/s11145-024-10562-3
Laura Sparaci, Valentina Fantasia, Chiara Bonsignori, Cecilia Provenzale, Domenico Formica, Fabrizio Taffoni
{"title":"Handwriting in primary school: comparing standardized tests and evaluating impact of grapho-motor parameters","authors":"Laura Sparaci, Valentina Fantasia, Chiara Bonsignori, Cecilia Provenzale, Domenico Formica, Fabrizio Taffoni","doi":"10.1007/s11145-024-10562-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A growing number of primary school students experience difficulties with grapho-motor skills involved in handwriting, which impact both form and content of their texts. Therefore, it is important to assess and monitor handwriting skills in primary school via standardized tests and detect specific grapho-motor parameters (GMPs) which impact handwriting legibility. Multiple standardized tools are available to assess grapho-motor skills in primary school, yet little is known on between-test agreement, on impact of specific GMPs on children’s overall performance and on which GMPs may be specifically hard to tackle for children that are starting to consolidate their handwriting skills. These data would be extremely relevant for clinicians, therapists and educators, who have to choose among different assessment tools as well as design tailored intervention strategies to reach adequate performance on different GMPs in cases of poor handwriting. To gain better understanding of currently available standardized tools, we compared overall performance of 39 Italian primary school children (19 second graders and 20 third graders) experiencing difficulties with handwriting on three standardized tests for grapho-motor skills assessment and explored the impact of individual GMPs on child performance. Results showed some agreement between tests considering all children in our sample, but no agreement in second grade and only limited agreement in third grade. Data also allowed highlighting significant correlations between some GMP scores and children’s overall performance in our sample. Finally, children in our sample appeared to experience specific difficulties with some GMPs, such as letter joins and alignment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48204,"journal":{"name":"Reading and Writing","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading and Writing","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10562-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A growing number of primary school students experience difficulties with grapho-motor skills involved in handwriting, which impact both form and content of their texts. Therefore, it is important to assess and monitor handwriting skills in primary school via standardized tests and detect specific grapho-motor parameters (GMPs) which impact handwriting legibility. Multiple standardized tools are available to assess grapho-motor skills in primary school, yet little is known on between-test agreement, on impact of specific GMPs on children’s overall performance and on which GMPs may be specifically hard to tackle for children that are starting to consolidate their handwriting skills. These data would be extremely relevant for clinicians, therapists and educators, who have to choose among different assessment tools as well as design tailored intervention strategies to reach adequate performance on different GMPs in cases of poor handwriting. To gain better understanding of currently available standardized tools, we compared overall performance of 39 Italian primary school children (19 second graders and 20 third graders) experiencing difficulties with handwriting on three standardized tests for grapho-motor skills assessment and explored the impact of individual GMPs on child performance. Results showed some agreement between tests considering all children in our sample, but no agreement in second grade and only limited agreement in third grade. Data also allowed highlighting significant correlations between some GMP scores and children’s overall performance in our sample. Finally, children in our sample appeared to experience specific difficulties with some GMPs, such as letter joins and alignment.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
小学手写:比较标准化测试和评估图形运动参数的影响
越来越多的小学生在手写的图形运动技能方面遇到困难,这既影响了文章的形式,也影响了文章的内容。因此,通过标准化测试来评估和监测小学生的手写技能,并检测影响手写可读性的特定图形运动参数(GMP)非常重要。目前有多种标准化工具可用于评估小学学生的图形运动技能,但人们对测试间的一致性、特定图形运动参数对儿童整体表现的影响以及哪些图形运动参数可能是刚开始巩固手写技能的儿童难以解决的问题却知之甚少。这些数据对于临床医生、治疗师和教育工作者来说极为重要,因为他们必须在不同的评估工具中做出选择,并设计出有针对性的干预策略,以便在不同的 GMPs 中使书写能力较差的儿童达到适当的水平。为了更好地了解目前可用的标准化工具,我们比较了 39 名手写有困难的意大利小学生(19 名二年级学生和 20 名三年级学生)在三种图形运动技能评估标准化测试中的总体表现,并探讨了单个 GMP 对儿童表现的影响。结果显示,在我们的样本中,所有儿童的测试结果都有一定的一致性,但二年级的测试结果没有一致性,三年级的测试结果也只有有限的一致性。数据还显示,在我们的样本中,一些 GMP 分数与儿童的总体表现之间存在明显的相关性。最后,我们样本中的儿童似乎在某些 GMP 方面遇到了特殊困难,如字母连接和对齐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
16.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Reading and writing skills are fundamental to literacy. Consequently, the processes involved in reading and writing and the failure to acquire these skills, as well as the loss of once well-developed reading and writing abilities have been the targets of intense research activity involving professionals from a variety of disciplines, such as neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics and education. The findings that have emanated from this research are most often written up in a lingua that is specific to the particular discipline involved, and are published in specialized journals. This generally leaves the expert in one area almost totally unaware of what may be taking place in any area other than their own. Reading and Writing cuts through this fog of jargon, breaking down the artificial boundaries between disciplines. The journal focuses on the interaction among various fields, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Reading and Writing publishes high-quality, scientific articles pertaining to the processes, acquisition, and loss of reading and writing skills. The journal fully represents the necessarily interdisciplinary nature of research in the field, focusing on the interaction among various disciplines, such as linguistics, information processing, neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, speech and hearing science and education. Coverage in Reading and Writing includes models of reading, writing and spelling at all age levels; orthography and its relation to reading and writing; computer literacy; cross-cultural studies; and developmental and acquired disorders of reading and writing. It publishes research articles, critical reviews, theoretical papers, and case studies. Reading and Writing is one of the most highly cited journals in Education, Educational Research, and Educational Psychology.
期刊最新文献
Subskills and sub-knowledge in Chinese as a second language reading comprehension: a structural equation modeling study Typing /s/—morphology between the keys? Initial validation of the handwriting proficiency screening questionnaire (HPSQ-C) translated to Spanish Understanding narratives in different media formats: Processes and products of elementary-school children’s comprehension of texts and videos Profiling text cohesion in the development of L2 Chinese reading materials: variation by text level and genre
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1