This study was conducted to determine if self-instructional strategy training would improve learning disabled students' writing. Students were taught a strategy designed to facilitate the generation, framing, and planning of argumentative essays. Training effects were investigated using a multiple-baseline across-subjects design, with multiple probes in baseline. Strategy instruction had a positive effect on students' writing performance and self-efficacy. Effects were maintained over time and transferred to a new setting and teacher. Evidence for generalization to a second genre, story writing, was also obtained. The students and their special education teacher recommended the use of the strategy with other students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanduraA., & SchunkD. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
2.
BrownA. L.BransfordJ. D.FerraraR. A., & CampioneJ. C. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In FlavellJ. H. & MarkamE. M. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Cognitive development (pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley.
3.
CaseL. P., & HarrisK. R. (1988, April). Self-instructional strategy training: Improving the mathematical problem solving skills of learning disabled students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
4.
DenoS.MarstonD., & MirkinP. (1982). Valid measurement procedures for continuous evaluation of written expression. Ex. Children, 48, 368–371.
5.
EnglertC., & RaphaelT. (1988). Constructing well-formed prose: Process, structure and metacognition in the instruction of expository writing. Exceptional Children, 54, 513–520.
6.
EnglertC.RaphaelT., & AndersonL. (1986, December). Metacognitive knowledge and writing skills of upper elementary students with special needs: Extensions of text structure research. Paper presented at Natl. Reading Conf., Austin, TX.
7.
GrahamS. (1982). Composition research and practice: A unified approach. Focus on Exceptional Children, 14, 1–16.
8.
GrahamS., (1989, April). The role of production factors in learning disabled students' compositions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Am. Ed. Res, Assoc., San Francisco.
9.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (1987). Improving composition skills of inefficient learners with self-instructional strategy training. Topics in Language Disorders, 7, 66–77.
10.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (1989). Cognitive training: Implications for written language. In HughesJ. & HallR. (Eds.), Cognitive behavioral psychology in the schools: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 247–279). New York: Guilford.
11.
GrahamS., & HarrisK. R. (in press). A components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Jrnl. of Ed. Psy.
12.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R., & SawyerR. (1987). Composition instruction with learning disabled students: Self-instructional strategy training. Focus on Exceptional Children, 20, 1–11.
13.
GrahamS., & MacArthurC. (1987). Written language of the handicapped. In ReynoldsC. & MannL. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (pp. 1678–1681). New York: Wiley.
14.
GrahamS., & MacArthurC. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training. Jrnl. of Sp. Ed., 22, 133–152.
15.
HammillD., & LarsenS. (1983). Test of Written Language. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
16.
HarrisK. R. (1982). Cognitive behavior modification: Application with exceptional students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 15, 1–16.
17.
HarrisK. R. (1985). Conceptual, methodological, and clinical issues in cognitive-behavioral assessment. Jrnl. of Abnrml. Chid Psy., 13, 373–390.
HarrisK. R., & GrahamS., (1988). Self-instructional strategy training: Improving writing skills among educationally handicapped students. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 20(2), 35–37.
20.
HarrisK. R.GrahamS., & FreemanS. (1988). The effects of strategy training and study conditions on metamemory among learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 54, 332–338.
21.
HarrisK. R.WongB. Y. L., & KeoghB. (Eds.). (1985). Cognitive-behavior modification with children: A critical review of the state-of-the-art [Sp. issue]. Jrnl. of Abnrml Chld Psy.13(3).
22.
HayesJ., & FlowerL. (1986). Writing research and the writerAm. Psy., 41, 1106–1113.
23.
MacArthurC., & GrahamS. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing, and dictation. Jrnl. of Sp. Ed., 21, 22–42.
24.
MeichenbaumD. (1977). Cognitive-behavior modification: An integrative approach. NY: Plenum Pr.
25.
NodineB.BarenbaumE., & NewcomerP. (1985). Story composition by learning disabled, reading disabled, and normal children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 167–179.
26.
ScardamaliaM., & BereiterC. (1986). Written composition. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 778–803). New York: MacMillan.
27.
ScardamaliaM.BereiterC., & GoelmanH. (1982). The role of production factors in writing ability. In NystrandM. (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 173–210). NY: Academic Press.
28.
SchunkD. H. (1983). Modeling and attributional effects on children's achievement: A self-efficacy analysis. Jrnl. of Ed. Psy., 73, 93–105.
29.
SchunkD. H. (1985). Participation in goal setting: Effects on self-efficacy and skills of learning-disabled children. Journal of Special Education, 19, 307–317.
30.
SteinN., & GlennC. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In FreedleR. O. (Ed.), Advances in discourse processes: New directions in discourse processing, (Vol. 2, pp. 53–120), Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
31.
ThomasC.EnglertC., & GreggS. (1987). An analysis of errors and strategies in the expository writing of learning disabled students. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 21–30.
