This article will discuss ways to use self–regulated strategy development for argumentative writing across content areas. The goal of self–regulated strategy development is for students to generalize the use of the strategy across settings, allowing them to become fluent and proficient writers in all areas. In addition, the generalization of the strategy across settings increases maintenance of skills across time. We will provide steps for educators to use the self–regulated strategy development instructional approach—more commonly used in reading, writing, and mathematics—across science and social studies content areas with key illustrations using new mnemonics from current practitioners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asaro–SaddlerK., MoeyaertM., XuX., & YerdenX. (2020). Multilevel meta–analysis of the effectiveness of self–regulated strategy development in writing for children with ASD. Exceptionality. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2020.1850457
2.
CiulloS., LembkeE. S., CarlisleA., ThomasC. N., GoodwinM., & JuddL. (2016). Implementation of evidence–based literacy practices in middle school response to intervention: An observation study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39(1), 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714566120
3.
CollinsA. A., CiulloS., GrahamS., SigafoosL. L., GuerraS., DavidM., & JuddL. (2021). Writing expository essays from social studies texts: A self–regulated strategy development study. Reading and Writing, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145–021–10157–2
4.
CookB. G., CookS, & CollinsL. W. (2016). Terminology and evidence–based practice for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: Exploring some devilish details. Beyond Behavior, 25(2), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/107429561602500202
5.
De La PazS., & ButlerC. (2018). Promoting motivated writers: Suggestions for teaching and conducting research with students with learning disabilities and struggling learners. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23(2), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ–2018–V23–I2–9064
6.
De La PazS., & WissingerD. R. (2017). Improving the historical knowledge and writing of students with or at risk for LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50(6), 658–671. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0022219416659444
7.
EnnisR. P., JolietteK., & BodenL. J. (2013). STOP and DARE: Self–regulated strategy development for persuasive writing with elementary students with E/BD in a residential facility. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0026
8.
FavellJ., & ReidD. (1988). Generalization and maintaining improvement in problem behavior. In HornerR. & KoegelR. (Eds.) Generalization and maintenance: Life–style changes in applied settings (pp. 171–196). Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
9.
FoxworthL., & MasonL. H. (2017). Writing–to–learn instruction that works. In RedondoR. F., HarrisK., & BraaksmaM. (Eds.), Design principles for teaching effective writing (pp. 66–86). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004270480_005
10.
GearyD. C. (2007). An evolutionary perspective on learning disability in mathematics. Developmental Neuropsychology, 32(1), 471–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640701360924
11.
Gillespie RouseA., & KiuharaS. A. (2017). SRSD in writing and professional development for teachers: Practice and promise for elementary and middle school students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 32(3), 180–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12140
GrahamS., CollinsA. A., & Rigby–WillsH. (2017). Writing characteristics of students with learning disabilities and typically achieving peers: A meta–analysis. Exceptional Children, 83(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0014402916664070
14.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta–analysis of SRSD studies. In SwansonH. L., HarrisK. R., & GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). Guilford Press.
15.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (2009). Almost 30 years of writing research: Making sense of it all with The Wrath of Khan. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(2), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540–5826.2009.01277.x
16.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (2017). Evidence–based writing practices: A meta–analysis of existing meta–analyses. In Design principles for teaching effective writing (pp. 13–37). Brill.
17.
GrahamS., HarrisK. R., KiuharaS. A., & FishmanE. J. (2017). The relationship among strategic writing behavior, writing motivation, and writing performance with young, developing writers. The Elementary School Journal, 118(1), 82–104. https://doi.org/10.1086/693009
18.
GrahamS., HarrisK. R., & McKeownD. (2013). The writing of students with learning disabilities, meta–analysis of self–regulated strategy development, writing intervention studies, and future directions. In SwansonH. L., HarrisK. R., & GrahamS. (Eds.) Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd edn., pp. 405–438). The Guilford Press.
19.
GrahamS., & HebertM. (2011). Writing to read: A meta–analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 710–744. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.4.t2k0m13756113566
20.
GrahamS.KiuharaS. A., & MacKayM. (2020). The effects of writing on learning in science, social studies, and mathematics: A meta–analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(2), 179–226. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320914744
21.
HarrisK.R., & GrahamS. (1999). Programmatic intervention research: Illustrations from the evolution of self‑regulated strategy development. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22(4), 251‑–262. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511259
22.
HarrisK. R., GrahamS., & MasonL. (2003). POW plus TREE equals powerful opinion essays. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(5), 74–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F004005990203400513
23.
HarrisK.R., GrahamS., MasonL. H., & FriedlanderB. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Brooks Publishing Co. Inc.
24.
HarrisK. R., GrahamS., AitkenA. A., BarkelA., HoustonJ., & RayA. (2017). Teaching spelling, writing, and reading for writing: Powerful evidence–based practices. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 49(4), 262–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917697250
25.
HughesC. A., & LeeJ. Y. (2019). Effective approaches for scheduling and formatting practice: Distributed, cumulative, and interleaved practice. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 51(6), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0040059919847194
26.
MacArthurC. A., & PhilippakosZ. A. (2013). Self–regulated strategy instruction in developmental writing: A design research project. Community College Review, 41(2), 176–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0091552113484580
27.
McKennaJ., FlowerA., FalcomataT., & AdamsonR. (2017). Function–based replacement behavior interventions for students with challenging behavior. Behavioral Interventions, 32(4), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1484
28.
McKeownD., BrindleM., HarrisK. R., SandmelK., SteinbrecherT. D., GrahamS., LaneK. L., & OakesW. P. (2017). Teachers’ voices: Perceptions of effective professional development and classwide implementation of self–regulated strategy development in writing. American Educational Research Journal, 56(3), 753–791. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218804146
29.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2017 Writing Assessment. Authors.
OakesW. P., LaneK. L., MenziesH. M., & BuckmanM. M. (2018). Instructional feedback: An effective, efficient, low–intensity strategy to support student success. Beyond Behavior, 27(3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F1074295618799354
32.
ReidR., & NelsonJ. (2002). The utility, acceptability, and practicality of Functional Behavioral Assessment for students with high–incidence problem behaviors. Remedial and Special Education, 23(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250202300103
33.
RoitschJ., MurphyK., & MichalekA. M. (2017). Effects of self–regulated strategy development on the writing skills of school–age children with attention–deficit/hyperactivity disorder. EBP Briefs, 12(4), 1–11. NCS Pearson, Inc.
34.
SandersS., RollinsL. H., MasonL. H., ShawA., & JolivetteK. (2020). Intensification and individualization of self–regulation components within self–regulated strategy development. Intervention in School and Clinic. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220941414
35.
SreckovicM. A., CommonE. A., KnowlesM. M., & LaneK. L. (2014). A review of self–regulated strategy development for writing for students with EBD. Behavioral Disorders, 39(2), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F019874291303900203
36.
StokesT., & BaerD. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1977.10–349
37.
StokesT., & OsnesP (1988). The developing applied technology of generalization and maintenance. In HornerR., DunlapG., and KoegelR. (Eds.). Generalization and maintenance: Lifestyle changes in applied settings. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
38.
SwansonH. L., & SiegelL. (2011). Learning disabilities as a working memory deficit. Experimental Psychology, 49(1), 5–28.
39.
ValcanD. S., DavisH. L., Pino–PasternakD., & MalpiqueA. A. (2020). Executive functioning as a predictor of children's mathematics, reading and writing. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 70, 101196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101196
40.
ZumbrunnS. & BruningR. (2013). Improving the writing and knowledge of emergent writers: The effects of self–regulated strategy development. Reading and Writing, 26(1), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145–012–9384–5
