5/5 Poonam C. 6 months ago on Google
prediction,
both
modalities
benefit
from
each
other,
as
the
user
is
constantly
drawing
on
both
his
spelling
and
reading
skills
in
his
efforts
to
produce
words.
In
fact,
there
is
support
for
a
more
integrated
approach
to
the
teaching
of
writing
and
reading
based
on
the
strong
association
between
the
two
skills.
Therefore,
word-prediction
can
be
seen
not
only
as
a
prosthetic
tool
for
spelling
difficulties,
but
also
as
a
training
aid
(Newell,
Arnott
et
al.,
1992)
that
is
educationally
valid.
However,
reading
is
a
decoding
process
and
spelling
is
an
encoding
process
(Allred,
1990)
and
although
there
is
a
high
correlation
between
the
performance
of
individuals
in
reading
and
spelling
skills,
discrepancies
between
reading
and
spelling
skills
may
have
an
important
impact
on
the
effectiveness
of
word-prediction.
If
a
child’s
reading
is
weaker
than
his
spelling,
it
may
seriously
limit
the
chances
of
word-
prediction
affecting
a
speed
increase,
or
even
a
spelling
accuracy
increase.
On
the
other
hand,
if
a
child
with
poor
spelling
skills
has
stronger
reading
skills,
word-prediction
could
be
expected
to
have
a
strong
positive
influence
in
improving
the
child’s
spelling
speed
and
accuracy.
Speed
enhancement
through
keystroke
reduction
Word-prediction
software
offers
a
50%
theoretical
reduction
in
keystrokes
(Anson,
1993).
A
keystroke
is
any
mouse
click
or
keyboard
key
event.
The
average
word
length
in
the
English
language
is
approximately
six
characters
long
but
only
two
to
four
characters
are
required
on
average
to
type
a
word
with
word-prediction
software.
Keystroke
reduction
would
appear
to
suggest
a
corresponding
decrease
in
input
time
compared
to
the
input
time
required
to
type
a
word
in
full.
However,
this
has
proved
not
to
be
the
case.
Even
with
an
almost
50%
reduction
in
keystrokes,
typing
with
word-prediction
often
requires
as
much
time
to
write
a
message
as
it
does
to
type
the
message
without
word-prediction
(Venkatagiri,
1993).
The
benefit
in
keystroke
savings
is
usually
offset
or
even
exceeded
by
the
cost
of
making
each
selection.
Scanning
the
prediction
list,
eye-gaze
shifts
(between
the
keyboard,
typing
text
and
prediction
list),
and
the
decision-making
involved
in
word
selection,
can
be
time
consuming.
The
efficiency
of
any
device-user
interaction
is
measured
by
two
important
indicators,
namely,
speed
and
accuracy
of
message
gene-
ration,
i.e.
operational
competence
(Szeto,
Allen
&
Littrell,
1993).
Significant
gains
in
spelling
accuracy
would
lose
their
value
if
there
were
significant
decreases
in
speed
and
increases
in
effort.
Improvements
in
the
quantity
of
work
completed
were
noted
in
case
studies
where
students
made
use
of
word-prediction
(Klund
&
Novak,
1995;
MacArthur,
1999).
This
was
explained
more
by
a
decrease
in
frustration
and
fatigue,
and
an
increase
in
motivation
that
may
accompany
greater
success
at
writing,
than
increased
speed
of
typing.
The
greater
the
presence
of
motor
difficulties,
the
greater
the
positive
impact
of
word-prediction
on
word
acceleration
(MacArthur,
1999).
If
par-
ticipants
do
not
have
motor
difficulties,
such
as
in
the
current
study,
on
