Print

Print
Message
The question of speech recognition is probably one of the most difficult to pin down, without looking at specific cases in the detail.
 
In order to properly test a student's trainability on VR in the needs assessment, assessors may well need to be as skilled as the best of our computer skills trainers. Some trainers have found it possible to train student voices on Dragon when we, and perhaps they, might not have thought it possible.
 
We have to be cautious about raising expectations to ideals in the assessment. Having said that, with sufficient commitment to make something work, students can often surprise us and themselves. If the student is having a very hard time with spelling or other writing obstacles, then the effort at speaking with sufficient formality to satisfy the needs of accurate VR is not as overwhelming as it might be to another student.
 
More importantly, differences of opinion usually indicate that there is an outstanding need issue that hasn't been resolved. We have to be prepared to rethink our original position, or at least to question it, to experiment, to stay with the question until the issue is resolved.
 
Sometimes, as 'professionals' or experts, we can be rather pompous in trying to explain away a student's difficulty, whether in one direction or another.
 
Clearly, we want to process requests as quickly as possible to deal with the volume of work. However, we have to make time for the niggles that won't go away and to be prepared to have the same question return for a while. Supporting students is as much about the way we deal with difficulties as it is the solutions that we propose.
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Litterick
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Dragon naturally speaking

I recently discovered that an LEA was quoting (horribly out of context) a talk of mine at BETT 2003 to justify never funding Speech Recognition for their children. The person who complained to me was able to get a detailed rationale from the LEA for this -- quoting me as if verbatim. So I was able to update, comment and put the remarks in context such that they could not be used in such a blanket negative way.
 
So it may be worth asking the LEA to justify in detail on what grounds they have come to this decision, and to take it from there.

Regards
Ian Litterick
http://www.iansyst.co.uk
http://www.dyslexic.com
Support the Right to Read Campaign <http://www.dyslexia.org.uk/r2r.php>. Sign up at http://www.dyslexia.org.uk/r2r.php

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of R.Fidler
Sent: 01 June 2005 08:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [DIS-FORUM] Dragon naturally speaking

I recently conducted a DSA needs assessment for a dyslexic student and recommended Dragon; the student had difficulty articulating ideas in a written form, but was able to express herself verbally in a competant manner.  The LEA has responded by saying that "Dragon Naturally Speaking has been deemed unsuitable for students with specific learning difficulties".  I personally find that voice-activated software is only suitable for some dyslexic students, depending upon their weaknesses in writing and their verbal abilities, but a general ruling seems rather strange to me.

I have challenged this, but has anyone else experienced this view or know on what basis it has been suggested.

Regards

Rob Fidler
Univ of Surrey and CELT assessor.