{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02771855010660981, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00810234541577825, 'mean_word_length': 5.589887640449438, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Word Processors and the Developmental Writer: A Teamwork of Tradition and Technology

Current research concerning the intersection of basic writers and word processing is still fresh and novel-and findings therefore remain unsettled-but computer-aided instruction for the classroom, though in its infancy, appears to be significant at all levels of basic composition instruction. However, the literature is replete with complex and often contradictory findings. While one article touts the word processor's ability to entice basic writers into making major, deep revisions, the next essay bemoans "smokescreen" revision, or the tendency to make only surface changes, as the word processor's major downfall; still another piece of research tells us that the traditional linear three-stage model of writing (prewriting, writing, and revision) is gone forever. It does appear, though, that basic writers' attitudes toward composition (particularly revision) improve noticeably when they write with word-processing packages (Gay 63; Hunter 29). Several word-processing functions have a positive impact on the development of writers with special needs. These include the computer's capability to reduce the physical demands of writing by replacing handwriting with typing; to change the social context of writing by encouraging collaboration on writing projects and publications for a variety of audiences; to promote interaction among teachers, students, and computers throughout the writing process; and to facilitate revision by using spelling checkers. In spite of such paradoxical information, at least one premature idea about the word processor as a writing tool-that it is a "miracle machine" capable of improving student writing independent of other variables-has been thoroughly debunked. Studies continue to show that when left alone, basic writers are not likely to take full advantage of computer technology (Cullen 210; Hunter 14; and Nichols 82). With that caveat in mind, composition instructors at Montana State University, who have for many years used Macintosh word processors to teach Basic Writing 001 (a course designed for a particular population of developmental writers), are rediscovering what they've known since at least 1980: the word processor can sometimes work composition miracles, most specifically (1) when a course