Handwriting legibility in primary school: comparing screen-based and validated paper-based assessments

Abstract Screen-based assessments of handwriting may ask children to write directly on a screen to measure grapho-motor parameters (such as letter size, line alignment, etc.) characterizing legibility of their handwritten texts. These tools have been recently considered as valid alternatives to paper-based assessments, often perceived as time consuming and over reliant on subjective coder judgements. But use of screen-based tools to assess handwriting legibility in primary school children is still limited because their effect on child performance still needs to be fully understood. To overcome this limitation, in the present study we contrast scores on 9 grapho-motor parameters obtained from a screen-based assessment of handwriting in 40 primary school children, to equivalent scores derived from validated paper-based tests on the same children. We also explored whether children’s familiarity with screen-based tools would impact their handwriting speed, a parameter that is strongly experience-based. Results showed significant correlations between screen-based assessment scores and validated paper-based tests supporting future applications of the former. But screen-based assessments also detected significantly more errors in almost all grapho-motor parameters. Preliminary data on familiarity with screen-based handwriting also suggests that this may have an impact on children’s handwriting speed. Notwithstanding these difficulties children liked using the new technology and, overall, screen-based assessments seem a promising alternative to traditional tests, but their efficient use will require the acquisition of new normative data and more in-depth assessments of tool familiarity.