My dear readers,

Well, here is what I have of my bibliography so far. I wasn't sure if we were supposed to include articles out of our textbook yet so I didn't. However, I will definitely use a few in my conference paper. In any case, enjoy.

ENG 701 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Johnston, Linda, Lawrence A. Beard, and Laura Bowden Carpenter Assistive technology: Access for all Students. Upper Saddle River, NJ. : Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall, 2007.

This book provides an excellent overview of the different types of assistive technologies available at the time of its publication. Included are descriptions and relative evaluations of not only speech recognition technologies, but also adaptive computer equipment such as different types of keyboards and mouses. These are most likely the type of technologies I will focus on in my paper because they are the sorts of technology I use most frequently myself. That is not to say that technologies for those with visual and hearing impairments are not discussed at great length in this volume. I found reading the sections quite illuminating they are just simply less relevant to what I'm doing.

2. Scherer, Marcia J. Connecting to Learn: Educational and Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2004.

This volume also provides an overview of assistive technologies of various types. However, it also takes the extra step of addressing at least in part the reasons certain assistive technologies are necessary in some situations and not others. Moreover, there is a brief discussion (too brief in my estimation) of what it took to draw attention to the need for assistive technology both inside of and outside of the classroom. I think this will provide a good basis.

3. Wilson, James C. and Lewiecki-Wilson, Cynthia. “Constructing a Third Space: Disability Studies, the Teaching of English, and Institutional Transformation” in Disability studies: Enabling the humanities. Ed. Snyder, Sharon L.; Brenda Jo Brueggemann and Rosemarie Garland Thomson,; New York: Modern Language Association of America 2002.

In conjunction with the entry directly following in this bibliography, this article appears to focus most of its energy on the struggle to include physically disabled students more fully in humanities classrooms. I have not yet had a chance to fully go through this piece but its ideas that including the disabled necessitates a fundamental change not only in education but in all areas of life is very powerful for me. I am eager to see exactly what transformations are referred to. If they refer to policy (as I think they do) or the different applications of various assistive technologies (which what I have read also indicates) then it will help me to make clear that there is not one single “super-technology” that will suffice for everyone.

4. Brueggemann , Brenda Jo. “An Enabling Pedagogy” in Disability studies: Enabling the humanities. Ed. Snyder, Sharon L.; Brenda Jo Brueggemann and Rosemarie Garland Thomson,; New York: Modern Language Association of America 2002.

Like the previous entry in this bibliography this essay lays out some of the pitfalls which have unfortunately come along with trying to make the classroom more inclusive. It also gives good analysis and critique of many assistive technologies and the ways that they are currently implemented. This includes a rather scathing review of the very voice recognition software I am using to construct this very bibliography. If nothing else this essay will help me to demonstrate a fact I sometimes forget, namely, that assistive technology is not perfect and that it is not a cure-all.

5. Berninger, Virginia W. and Winn, William D. “Implications of Advancements in Brain Research and Technology for Writing Development, Writing Instruction, and Educational Evolution” in Handbook of writing research Ed. MacArthur, Charles A.; Steve Graham; Jill Fitzgerald. New York: Guilford Press, 2008.

this article discusses continual advances in research as to how the brain works normally, and also how it might be expected to work with varying degrees of different disabilities. This includes my own condition, cerebral palsy and hydrocephalus. Just as importantly, if the idea that due to the differing degrees of brain function between disabilities the use of speech recognition software may yield wildly different results. Thus, speech recognition software is not necessarily the best for everyone. As such, the article details not only how research is continuing to try to make speech recognition software more usable for different types of disabilities, but also alternatives such as word prediction software, and motion sensitive writing programs. These will allow me not only to interweave my own experience with what I have read it again to show that one type of assistive technology is not necessarily perfect for everyone.

6. MacArthur, Charles A. “The effects of new technologies on writing and writing processes” in Handbook of writing research Ed. MacArthur, Charles A.; Steve Graham; Jill Fitzgerald. New York: Guilford Press, 2008.

This article’s themes are sort of what I had in mind when I wrote my dissonance paper and talked about Allen Ginsberg using his tape recorder. It talks about how parts of or the whole of the composition process can be fundamentally altered based upon the composition media employed by the writer. It talks about how the relative speed and ease of composing on a computer or another media beyond paper and pencil has opened up writing beyond the traditional academic and literary fields. It will help me I believe to show the fundamental differences I perceive in the writing process when composing by voice as opposed to by hand.

7. Quinlan, Thomas. “Speech Recognition Technology and Students with Writing Difficulties: Improving Fluency” Journal of Educational Psychology 96.2 2004.

As the title implies this article deals with the use of speech recognition technology by and with writers, disabled and otherwise, who might otherwise be reluctant to write. It discusses particularly how many struggling writers and given access to this type of technology are able to write much more freely and coherently because they perceive less of a disconnect between the thoughts in their heads and their words on the page. In other words, by not having to take the intermediate step of physically writing anything down and all which that involves, these writers are more fully able to concentrate on delivering their thoughts in a more well constructed manner. Some of the implications of this article concerning relative physical ease and the ability to focus more fully on the thoughts needed to construct interesting prose I have thought about for many years. It will be nice to interweave my own experience using this type of technology with the experimental type experiences of someone looking at it from a more objective point of view.

8. McNaughton, David. “'You Talk, it Types?'--Not Quite: Speech Recognition Technology for Post-secondary Students with Disabilities” Journal of Post-Secondary Education and Disability 13.2 1998.

This article centers around what I would have to say is the one Achilles' heel of the sort of speech recognition technology I use. That is, the fact that its recognition is not always accurate. That certain level of inaccuracy the article contends has stopped this type of technology from thus far been more widely adopted in education and elsewhere. With this I agree, but I believe that once I have had time to fully combine the article's criticisms of this type of software with my other research and personal experience I can still show that for many students like myself speech recognition software is a tool with many more advantages than disadvantages.

Thank you so much for your time,

James Altman