Matre, M. E., & Cameron, D. L. (2024). A scoping review on the use of speech-to-text technology for adolescents with learning difficulties in secondary education . Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology , 19 (3), 1103–1116. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2022.2149865

Speech-to-text (STT) technology was examined as an assessment accommodation. Both standalone STT and STT combined with other assistive technologies were included in the review. The technology was used either as an assistive tool (compensatory aid for poor writing performance) or as an instructional technology to improve overall writing and related skills.

Eight peer-reviewed studies and five publications of grey literature that focused on secondary school students (ages 12–18) with learning difficulties, particularly in writing, were included in the scoping review. The reviewed studies were conducted in Sweden, the United States, and Scotland between January 2000 and April 2022.

Multiple outcome measures were analyzed across the included studies, falling into five main categories: (1) writing-related skills (word recognition, spelling, reading comprehension), (2) text assessment measures (holistic text quality, length, vocabulary, errors), (3) writing process measures (planning time, composing time, revising time), (4) accuracy of the technology, and (5) participants' experiences (student motivation, learning outcomes, strengths/weaknesses of the technology). Data collection methods from the studies included standardized assessments, writing samples, surveys, interviews, and classroom observations.

STT may increase students' abilities to produce texts with fewer errors, provide help with spelling, and improve reading comprehension and word recognition among students with learning difficulties. Less fluent writers demonstrated significantly fewer surface errors when using STT compared to handwriting, though no significant differences were found for more fluent writers. Both intervention and comparison groups improved as much in one year as did the normed population. Parents, teachers, and pupils generally reported positive experiences with the technology, particularly for students with severe reading and writing difficulties, though some technical, contextual, and emotional barriers were identified.