Search

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the sudden cancellation of in-class instruction for many students around the world presented an unprecedented disruption in children's education. As the COVID-19 pandemic took form, multiple concerns were raised about the potential negative impact on students' learning. The current study examined this proposition for children's writing. We compared the quality of writing, handwriting fluency, and attitude toward writing of first grade Norwegian students during the COVID-19 pandemic (421 girls, 396 boys), which included emergency remote instruction for almost 7 weeks, with first grade students in the same schools a year before the pandemic began (835 girls, 801 boys). After controlling for variance due to national test scores, school size, proportion of certified teachers, students per special education teacher, school hours per student, student gender, and native language, we found that students attending first grade during the pandemic had lower scores for writing quality, handwriting fluency, and attitude toward writing than their first grade peers tested a year earlier before the COVID-19 pandemic emerged. Implications for policy and instruction as well as future research are presented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) Impact Statement In December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus was identified, and it spread across the world quickly causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, presenting unprecedented challenges for the education of school-age children. This study examined the impact of the pandemic and the temporary 7 week replacement of in class learning with online instruction on the writing of first grade children in Norway. First grade students tested shortly after the end of online instruction displayed a learning loss, having lower scores on measures of writing quality, handwriting fluency, and attitude toward writing than first grade children from the same schools tested a year earlier before the start of the pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

In this meta-analysis, we examined whether children identified with reading difficulties (RD) evidence writing difficulties. We included studies comparing children with RD with (a) typically developing peers matched on age (k = 87 studies) and (b) typically developing younger peers with similar reading capabilities (k = 24 studies). Children identified with RD scored lower on measures of writing than their same age peers (g = −1.25) when all writing scores in a study were included in the analysis. This same pattern occurred for specific measures of writing: quality (g = −0.95), output (g = −0.66), organization (g = −0.72), sentence skills (g = −0.78), vocabulary (g = −1.17), syntax (g = −1.07), handwriting (g = −0.64), and spelling (g = −1.42). Differences in the writing scores of children identified with RD and same age peers were moderated by whether the writing assessment was a norm-referenced or researcher-designed measure when all writing measures or just spelling were included in the analyses. Depth of orthography for studies involving European languages also moderated differences in the spelling scores of children identified with RD and same age peers. Finally, children identified with RD scored lower on writing than younger peers with similar reading capabilities (g = −0.94) and more specifically on spelling (−0.93). We concluded that children with RD experience difficulties with writing, providing support for theoretical propositions of reading and writing connections as well as the importance of writing instruction for these students. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

A random sample of language arts, social studies, and science high school teachers (N = 361; 53% women) from the United States were surveyed about what their students wrote, their use of evidence-based writing practices, the adaptations they made for weaker writers, how they assessed writing, their preparation to teach writing, beliefs about the importance of writing, and judgments about their students' writing capabilities. The findings from this survey raised some concerns about the quality of high school writing instruction. The writing activities they were assigned most frequently by teachers involved little analysis and interpretation, and almost one half of the participating teachers did not assign at least one multiparagraph writing assignment monthly. Although the majority of high school teachers did apply most of the evidence-based practices and adaptations included in the survey, they used these practices infrequently. Most teachers did not believe their college teacher education program adequately prepared them to teach writing. A sizable minority of language arts and social studies teachers indicated that their in-service preparation was inadequate too. For science teachers this was close to 60%.

There is considerable concern that students do not develop the writing skills needed for school, occupational, or personal success. A frequent explanation for this is that schools do not do a good job of teaching this complex skill. A recent meta-analysis of true- and quasi-experimental writing intervention research (S. Graham & D. Perin, 2007a) addressed this issue by identifying effective instructional writing practices. The current review extends this earlier work by conducting a meta-analysis of single subject design writing intervention studies. The authors located 88 single subject design studies where it was possible to calculate an effect size. They calculated an average effect size for treatments that were tested in 4 or more studies, using a similar outcome measure in each study. This resulted in the identification of 9 writing treatments that were supported as effective. These were strategy instruction for planning/drafting, teaching grammar and usage, goal setting for productivity, strategy instruction for editing, writing with a word processor, reinforcing specific writing outcomes, use of prewriting activities, teaching sentence construction skills, and strategy instruction for paragraph writing.

A random sample of primary-grade teachers from across the United States was surveyed about within-class ability grouping in reading. Sixty-three percent of participants reported using within-class ability groups. Groups are smaller and more flexible than those formed in the past, with teachers emphasizing teaching comprehension, reading vocabulary, and other basic reading skills to each of their groups. Most teachers reported that they used within-class ability grouping because it helps them meet their students' instructional needs, although there were some reasons for concern. For instance, students in lower ability groups spend more time involved in noninstructional activities, are less likely to be asked critical comprehension questions, and are given fewer opportunities to select their own reading material.

The authors investigated ways of encouraging students to consider more counterarguments when writing argumentative texts. One hundred eighty-four undergraduates wrote essays on TV violence. In Experiment 1, students given specific goals generated more counterarguments and rebuttals than controls. In Experiment 2, some participants were provided with a text outlining arguments/counterarguments; some were also asked to write a persuasive letter. Prior attitudes toward the topic were also measured. Persuasion instructions negatively affected and text (without persuasion instructions) positively affected counterargumentation and the overall quality of arguments. Text was only effective, however, for students with less extreme prior attitudes. The danger of using persuasion goals and the advantages of using more specific goals (with text) are discussed.

Mastering sentence-construction skills is essential to learning to write. Limited sentence-construction skills may hinder a writer's ability to translate ideas into text. It may also inhibit or interfere with other composing processes, as developing writers must devote considerable cognitive effort to sentence construction. The authors examined whether instruction designed to improve sentence-construction skills was beneficial for more and less skilled 4th-grade writers. In comparison with peers receiving grammar instruction, students in the experimental treatment condition became more adept at combining simpler sentences into more complex sentences. For the experimental students, the sentence-combining skills produced improved story writing as well as the use of these skills when revising.

Primary grade teachers from across the United States were surveyed about their instructional adaptations for weaker writers. Although many teachers were sensitive to struggling writers' individual needs, there was a sizable percentage of teachers (42%) who made few or no adaptations. The most common adaptations made by teachers addressed students' difficulties with the mechanics of writing or writing processes, such as planning and revising. Other adaptations that were relatively common involved providing extra conferences, minilessons, and reteaching. Percentage of classroom students with special needs and amount of time students spend writing each week both made a significant contribution to predicting the number of adaptations reported by teachers, once the contribution of all other variables was controlled. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

The contribution of supplemental spelling instruction to spelling, writing, and reading was examined. Second-grade children experiencing difficulties learning to spell participated in 48 20-min sessions designed to improve their spelling skills. In comparison with peers in a contact control condition receiving mathematics instruction, students in the spelling condition made greater improvements on norm-referenced spelling measures, a writing-fluency test, and a reading word-attack measure following instruction. Six months later, students in the spelling treatment maintained their advantage in spelling but not on the writing-fluency and reading word-attack measures. However, spelling instruction had a positive effect at maintenance on the reading word-recognition skills of children who scored lowest on this measure at pretest. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Third graders with low compositional fluency (N = 96) were randomly assigned to 4 time-equated treatments in an instructional experiment (24 lessons over 4 months): spelling (alphabetic principle plus its alternations), composing (reflective discussion plus teacher scaffolding), combined spelling (alphabetic principle) plus composing (teacher scaffolding), and treated control (writing practice, no instruction). All treatments increased compositional fluency. Spelling and combined spelling plus composing were most effective for word-specific spelling (taught words). Teaching alternations improved phonological decoding and transferred to spelling in composing. Composing and combined spelling plus composing were most effective for persuasive essay writing. Only combined spelling plus composing increased both spelling and composing. Results are related to the simple view of writing that integrates diverse theoretical traditions and instructional practices.

The contribution of handwriting to learning to write was examined in an experimental training study involving beginning writers with and without an identified disability. First-grade children experiencing handwriting and writing difficulties participated in 27 fifteen-min sessions designed to improve the accuracy and fluency of their handwriting. In comparison to their peers in a contact control condition receiving instruction in phonological awareness, students in the handwriting condition made greater gains in handwriting as well as compositional fluency immediately following instruction and 6 months later. The effects of instruction were similar for students with and without an identified disability. These findings indicate that handwriting is causally related to writing and that explicit and supplemental handwriting instruction is an important element in preventing writing difficulties in the primary grades.

This study examined the effects of goal setting on the essays of 7th- and 8th-grade students with writing and learning disabilities. Participants wrote 3 essays, responding to a different goal for each. One half of the students used a strategy to facilitate goal attainment. Goals were designed to increase either the number of reasons supporting a paper's premise or the number of counterarguments refuted by the writer, or both. Papers written in response to goals were longer, included more supporting reasons, and were qualitatively better than essays written by students in the control condition. Students were also more likely to refute counterarguments when assigned a goal that focused on this specific element. Strategy use enhanced performance only when students were responding to a goal to refute more counterarguments. Students' writing self-efficacy was not influenced by goal setting or strategy use.

Poor spellers in 2nd grade (n = 128) participated in 24 20-min sessions that included (a) direct instruction in the alphabet principle (most frequent phoneme-spelling connections); (b) modeling of different approaches, singly and in combination, for developing connections between spoken and written words for 48 words ordered by sound-spelling predictability; and (c) practice in composing. Results of this multilayered intervention showed that (a) more than 1 way of developing sound-spelling connections is effective in teaching spelling but that after training in the alphabet principle, combining whole word and onset-rime training is most effective in achieving transfer of the alphabet principle across word contexts; (b) functional spelling units of not only a single letter but also 2 or more letters are important in beginning spelling; and (c) training in spelling transfers to composition and word recognition.

This study examined the role of executive control in the revising problems of 8th graders with writing and learning difficulties. The contribution of executive control was examined by providing students with executive support in carrying out the revising process. Students learned to use a routine that ensured that the individual elements involved in revising were coordinated and occurred in a regular way. Compared with revising under normal conditions, executive support made the process of revising easier for students and improved their revising behavior. They revised more often, produced more meaning-preserving revisions that improved text, and revised larger segments of text more frequently when using the executive routine. Executive support also had a greater impact on the overall quality of students' text than did normal revising. Students' difficulties with revising were not due solely to problems with executive control because they also experienced difficulties with the separate elements involved in revising.

Almost 700 children were screened to identify 144 1st graders at risk for handwriting problems who were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 treatment conditions. Treatment was delivered to groups of 3 that met twice a week in 20-min sessions until they completed 24 lessons. Five groups received 10 min of different kinds of handwriting instruction. The contact control group received 10 min of phonological awareness training. All 6 groups composed and shared their writing for 10 min. Converging evidence across multiple measures showed that combining numbered arrows and memory retrieval was the most effective treatment for improving both handwriting and compositional fluency (composing with time limits). Thus instruction aimed at improving transcription transfers to improved text generation in beginning writers.

This study examined the role of executive control in the revising difficulties of 5th- and 6th-grade students with writing and learning problems. Procedural support was provided in carrying out executive processes by teaching students to use a routine that ensured that the separate elements of the revising process were coordinated and occurred in a regular way. The processing burden involved in revising was further reduced by limiting the types of evaluative and tactical decisions students made. In comparison to their normal approach to revising, procedural support made the process of revising easier for the participating students and increased the number of nonsurface revisions that improved text. Students' difficulties with revising, however, were not due solely to problems with executive control; they were generally indifferent to the possible concerns of their audience, overemphasized form, and struggled with the separate elements underlying revising. Implications for instruction were addressed.

This study examined the effects of dictation and explicit instruction in planning on the composing skills of students in 5th-, 6th-, and 7th-grade with learning disabilities. Students received instruction in either (a) planning, where students learned a strategy for developing, evaluating, and organizing ideas prior to composing, or (b) comparison, where students learned about essay structure, revised sample essays, and composed and shared essays with peers. In both conditions, half the students dictated and half the students wrote their plans and essays. The combination of dictation and instruction in advanced planning resulted in more complete and qualitatively better essays in contrast to those written by students in the comparison condition on both a posttest and 2-week maintenance probe. Results indicate advanced planning is important when using dictation to compose.

The authors used multiple-group structural equation modeling to analyze structural relationships between latent factors underlying separate measures of handwriting, spelling, and composing in Grades 1-6. For compositional fluency, the paths from both handwriting and spelling were significant in the primary grades, but only the path from handwriting was significant in the intermediate grades. For compositional quality, only the path from handwriting was significant at the primary and intermediate grades. The contribution of spelling to compositional quality was indirect through its correlation with handwriting. Handwriting and spelling accounted for a sizable proportion of the variance in compositional fluency (41% to 66%) and compositional quality (25% to 42%). These findings show that the mechanical skills of writing may exert constraints on amount and quality of composing. Theoretical and educational implications of the findings are discussed.

This study examined the effects of a revising goal to «add information» on the revising behavior and writing performance of 5th- and 6th-grade students with writing and learning problems. The authors also examined whether procedural assistance in meeting the goal to add information would enhance students'performance. In comparison to students assigned a general revising goal to make their paper better, students assigned a goal to add information made more meaning-based changes, particularly additions, when revising their papers. Most importantly, the goal to add information resulted in greater improvement in text quality than the general revising goal. Use of the procedural facilitator to accomplish the goal to add information, however, did not appreciably enhance students'revising behavior or the quality of their text

The effects of mechanical interference, rate of production, and contentless production signals to write more on the quantity and quality of fourth- and sixth-grade learning disabled (LD) students' compositions were examined

22 eleves de 10 a 13 ans en difficulte d'apprentissage (QI moyen de 95) et 11 eleves normaux pratiquent un entrainement aux strategies d'auto-instruction sur des tâches de composition. On analyse les performances en termes de composantes dans la redaction d'une histoire, pour determiner l'impact de cet entrainement sur chacun des groupes