Previous work suggests that written text produced by university students with dyslexia is scored lower than that produced by their peers. The present study used a digital writing tablet to examine the writing process and the quality of text written by university students with dyslexia. Revision behavior during and after writing was also investigated. Thirty-two university students with dyslexia (mean age, 20 years), were compared with 32 typically developing (TD) students matched by age. Students composed a written text in response to an expository essay prompt. In line with previous research, students with dyslexia made a higher number of spelling errors and their essays were rated as poorer than TD students. However, students with dyslexia were comparable to their peers on measures of time spent writing, amount of text produced, and the temporal analyses (handwriting execution, pause times). Students with dyslexia made significantly more revisions to spelling during and after transcription than their peers, although other revision behavior was similar across groups. Explanations for the finding of poor writing quality are explored. Importantly, the findings suggest that continued support with spelling and writing is needed for university students with dyslexia. Instruction directed toward effective revision strategies may also prove useful. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

有和无阅读障碍学生的写作和复习策略

先前的研究表明，患有阅读障碍的大学生撰写的书面文本得分低于同龄人。本研究使用数字书写板来检查有阅读障碍的大学生的写作过程和文本质量。还调查了写作期间和之后的修订行为。将 32 名患有阅读障碍的大学生（平均年龄 20 岁）与 32 名按年龄匹配的典型发展 (TD) 学生进行比较。学生根据说明性论文提示撰写书面文本。与之前的研究一致，有阅读障碍的学生拼写错误的次数更多，他们的论文被评为比 TD 学生差。然而，有阅读障碍的学生在写作时间、产生的文本量、和时间分析（手写执行、暂停时间）。有阅读障碍的学生在转录过程中和转录后对拼写的修改明显多于同龄人，尽管其他修改行为在各组中相似。探索了发现较差写作质量的解释。重要的是，研究结果表明，患有阅读障碍的大学生需要继续支持拼写和写作。针对有效修订策略的指导也可能被证明是有用的。讨论了未来研究的局限性和方向。探索了发现较差写作质量的解释。重要的是，研究结果表明，患有阅读障碍的大学生需要继续支持拼写和写作。针对有效修订策略的指导也可能被证明是有用的。讨论了未来研究的局限性和方向。探索了发现较差写作质量的解释。重要的是，研究结果表明，患有阅读障碍的大学生需要继续支持拼写和写作。针对有效修订策略的指导也可能被证明是有用的。讨论了未来研究的局限性和方向。