View in EDS

A scoping review of transcription instruction involving children with autism.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A scoping review of transcription instruction involving children with autism.
Authors: Bailey, Benjamin (AUTHOR), Philpott‐Robinson, Kelsey (AUTHOR), Ray, Karen (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Research in Reading. Feb2026, Vol. 49 Issue 1, p1-30. 30p.
Subjects: Autistic children, Handwriting, Keyboarding, Orthography & spelling, Writing education, Teaching methods
Abstract: Background: Spelling, handwriting and typing (transcription) skills are foundational to writing development. This scoping review maps the research on transcription instruction involving children with autism, highlighting promising practices and future research priorities. Method: A systematic search identified relevant studies, with data extracted and critically appraised in line with established protocols. Results: Of 4859 identified studies, 28 met inclusion criteria. Most were of moderate strength and good quality and reported on the effects of handwriting (n = 14) or spelling instruction (n = 9), finding that purpose‐built and established programmes designed for the general population may benefit some autistic children. Few studies (n = 4) reported on how instruction is delivered or autistic children's experiences (n = 1). Conclusion: Established programmes, including Cover‐Copy‐Compare and Handwriting Without Tears, show promise when adjusted to meet users' needs. Future research should engage the Autistic community in co‐designing instruction tailored to individual needs and preferences. Highlights: What is already known about this topic: Spelling, handwriting and typing (transcription) skills are foundational to early writing development.Previous reviews show that some children with autism have difficulty learning to transcribe. What this paper adds: The current review maps the research on transcription instruction involving children with autism for the purposes of highlighting promising practices and guiding future research.Most studies focused on the effects of spelling or handwriting instruction on children's early writing skills, providing preliminary evidence in support of several programmes/methods.Few studies explored how autistic children and their supporters view transcription instruction, providing limited but valuable insight into preferred and valued approaches.Critical appraisal showed that most studies were of moderate strength and good quality. Implications for theory, policy or practice: The reviewed research falls short of informing definitive best practice recommendations or policy.Based on the weight and quality of evidence and reported learning outcomes, the established Cover‐Copy‐Compare method and Handwriting Without Tears programme show promise in supporting autistic children when adjusted to meet individuals' needs, though it is unclear whether these approaches were preferred or valued by their users.Professionals looking to support autistic children's transcription development using established programs should carefully identify and consider the needs of individual children and potential adjustments to instruction protocols.Future studies should look to co‐design instruction methods that are optimally accessible to children with autism and address limitations evident in the previous research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Research in Reading is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Background: Spelling, handwriting and typing (transcription) skills are foundational to writing development. This scoping review maps the research on transcription instruction involving children with autism, highlighting promising practices and future research priorities. Method: A systematic search identified relevant studies, with data extracted and critically appraised in line with established protocols. Results: Of 4859 identified studies, 28 met inclusion criteria. Most were of moderate strength and good quality and reported on the effects of handwriting (n = 14) or spelling instruction (n = 9), finding that purpose‐built and established programmes designed for the general population may benefit some autistic children. Few studies (n = 4) reported on how instruction is delivered or autistic children's experiences (n = 1). Conclusion: Established programmes, including Cover‐Copy‐Compare and Handwriting Without Tears, show promise when adjusted to meet users' needs. Future research should engage the Autistic community in co‐designing instruction tailored to individual needs and preferences. Highlights: What is already known about this topic: Spelling, handwriting and typing (transcription) skills are foundational to early writing development.Previous reviews show that some children with autism have difficulty learning to transcribe. What this paper adds: The current review maps the research on transcription instruction involving children with autism for the purposes of highlighting promising practices and guiding future research.Most studies focused on the effects of spelling or handwriting instruction on children's early writing skills, providing preliminary evidence in support of several programmes/methods.Few studies explored how autistic children and their supporters view transcription instruction, providing limited but valuable insight into preferred and valued approaches.Critical appraisal showed that most studies were of moderate strength and good quality. Implications for theory, policy or practice: The reviewed research falls short of informing definitive best practice recommendations or policy.Based on the weight and quality of evidence and reported learning outcomes, the established Cover‐Copy‐Compare method and Handwriting Without Tears programme show promise in supporting autistic children when adjusted to meet individuals' needs, though it is unclear whether these approaches were preferred or valued by their users.Professionals looking to support autistic children's transcription development using established programs should carefully identify and consider the needs of individual children and potential adjustments to instruction protocols.Future studies should look to co‐design instruction methods that are optimally accessible to children with autism and address limitations evident in the previous research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:01410423
DOI:10.1111/1467-9817.70016