Click here to download

Pen or keyboard. An empirical study on the effects of technology on writing skills
Journal Title: CADMO 
Author/s: Benedetto Vertecchi, Antonella Poce, Francesco Agrusti, Maria Rosaria Re 
Year:  2016 Issue: Language: English 
Pages:  12 Pg. 33-44 FullText PDF:  163 KB
DOI:  10.3280/CAD2016-002004
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

The research reported in this article underlines the need to adopt a reflective attitude to the use of digital resources in teaching and learning. This relates to a growing body of research by different scholars in many countries. The present study underlines the need to adopt a reflective attitude to the use of digital resources in teaching and learning. The research starts from the assumption that students can develop their writing and critical thinking skills thanks to specific writing activities. Such activities regard the elaboration of short essays, both by hand and on computer keyboards, with the aim to highlight the difference in results. Within the paper, a specific assessment grid was outlined to evaluate students’ essays. Short essays written by students were produced in two different ways: by hand or keyboard. All data have been collected and analyzed to highlight the different results in skills development, according to the writing tool employed. From the analyses carried out and the results collected, handwritten short essays got higher scores than computer written texts: computer use in writing activities apparently reduces performances level in the majority of students taken into consideration.
Keywords: Writing skills, higher education, teaching evaluation, critical thinking, handwriting

  1. Bloom H. (1994), The Western Canon. The Books and School of the Ages, New York: Berkeley Publishing Group.
  2. Cingle, D., Sundar S. (2012), “Texting, Techspeak, and Tweens: The Relationship between Text Messaging and English Grammar Skills”, New Media & Society, May 11,, u.a. 15/4/2014.
  3. Crystal, D. (2001), Language and the Internet. Cambridge (UK): OUP.
  4. Garin E. (1957), L’educazione in Europa, Bari: Laterza.
  5. Krippendorf, K. (2004), Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
  6. Laurillard, D. (2008), Digital Technologies and their Role in Achieving our Ambitions for Education, London: IOE.
  7. Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J.C., Anton, J.L., Roth, M., Nazarian B. et al. (2008), “Learning through Hand or Typewriting Influences Visual Recognition of New Graphic Shapes: Behavioural and Functional Imaging Evidence”, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, pp. 802-815.
  8. Longcamp, M., Hlushchuk, Y., Hari, R. (2011), “What differs in Visual Recognition of Handwritten vs Printed Letters? An FMRI Study”, Human Brain Mapping, 32, pp. 1250-1259.
  9. Losito G. (1993), L’analisi del contenuto nella ricerca sociale. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  10. Marra R.M. et al. (2004), “Content Analysis of Online discussions Forums: A Comparative Analysis of Protocols”, Educational Technology Research and Development, LII, 2, pp. 23-40.
  11. Myers, J. (2012), “Texting Affects Ability to interpret Words”, Utoday, https://www. 2012/texting, u.a. 15.04.2014.
  12. Newman D.R., Webb B., Cochrane C. (1997), “Evaluating the Quality of Learning in Computer Supported co-operative Learning”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, XLVIII, 6, pp. 484-495.
  13. OECD (2010), Investing in Human and Social Capital: New Challenges, theme 1, “Tackling the Effects of the Crisis on Education”, Paris, 0,3407,en_21571361_44559030_1_1_1_1_1,00.html, 09.05.2013.
  14. OECD (2010), Investing in Human and Social Capital: New Challenges, theme 2, “Matching skills with new needs”, Paris,,3407, en_21571361_44559030_1_1_1_1_1,00.html, l.a. 09.05.2013.
  15. Paul, R., Elder, L. (2002), Critical Thinking: Tools for taking Charge of you Professional and Personal Life. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Education.
  16. Poce A. (a cura di) (2012), Contributi per la definizione di una tecnologia critica: un'esperienza di valutazione, Premessa di B. Vertecchi. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  17. Poce, A. (2006), “Valutare gli apprendimenti mediatizzati”, in I percorsi e i processi della didattica multimediale. Strumenti e metodologie per processi educativi innovativi, a cura di F. Faiella. Lecce: Pensa.
  18. Poce, A. (a cura di) (2012), Contributi per la definizione di una tecnologia critica. Un’esperienza di valutazione. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  19. Poce, A., Corcione L., Iovine A. (2012), “Content Analysis and Critical Thinking. An Assessment Study”, Cadmo, XX, 1, pp. 47-63.
  20. Poce, A., Corcione L., Iovine A., Agrusti F. (2011), Il Podcasting nello strumentario dell’istruzione in rete. Verifica sperimentale delle nuove ipotesi. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  21. Ritchel, M. (2011), A Silicon Valley School That Doesn’t Compute, 22 October, -- -technology-canwait.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, u.a. 15.04.2014.
  22. Rositi, F. (1988), “L’analisi del contenuto”, in La ricerca sull’industria culturale, a cura di F. Rositi e M. Livolsi. Roma: La Nuova Italia Scientifica.
  23. Spitzer, M. (2013), “To Swipe or not to Swipe? The Question in Present-day Education”, Trends in Neuroscience and Education, http://www.sciencedirect. com/science/journal/ 22119493, u.a. 22.04.2014.
  24. Suto, I. (2012), “What are the Impacts of Qualifications for 16 to 19 Year Olds on Higher Education? A Survey of 633 University Lecturers”, Cambridge Assessment, April, heresearch-survey-of-lecturers-executive-summary.pdf.
  25. Vertecchi, B. (2011), “Ocse. Più attenzione ai contesti”, Tuttoscuola, 48, pp. 18-19.
  26. Vertecchi, B., Poce, A., Angelini, C., Agrusti, F. (2011), Orbis Dictus. Un ambiente adattivo multilingue per l’istruzione in rete. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Benedetto Vertecchi, Antonella Poce, Francesco Agrusti, Maria Rosaria Re, in "CADMO" 2/2016, pp. 33-44, DOI:10.3280/CAD2016-002004


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content