In this study, fifth-grade students with learning disabilities received instruction designed to help them incorporate three common planning strategies into their current approach to writing. Students learned to set goals, brainstorm ideas, and sequence their ideas while writing stories and completing self-selected homework assignments. To facilitate maintenance and generalization, instruction included a variety of procedures for inducing the thoughtful or mindful application of the planning strategies. Following instruction, planning became a prominent part of the composing process, as students spent as much time planning papers as writing them. Correspondingly, the schematic structure of students' stories improved and their papers became longer. These effects generalized to a second, uninstructed genre, persuasive essay writing, and were generally maintained over time.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderP.GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1998). A perspective on strategy research: Progress and prospect. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 129–154.
2.
De La PazS.GrahamS. (1997a). Effects of dictation and advanced planning instruction on the composing of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 203–222.
3.
De La PazS.GrahamS. (1997b). Strategy instruction in planning: Effects on the writing performance and behavior of students with learning difficulties. Exceptional Children, 63, 167–181.
4.
EllisE. S. (1986). The role of motivation and pedagogy on the generalization of cognitive training by the mildly handicapped. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 66–70.
5.
FlowerL.HayesJ. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In GreggL. W.SteinbergE. R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 31–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*
6.
GouldJ. D. (1980). Experiments on composing letters: Some facts, some myths, and some observations. In GreggL. W.SteinbergE. R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 97–127). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.*
7.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1989). A components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 353–361.
8.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1996). Self-regulation and strategy instruction for children who find writing and learning challenging. In LevyM.RansdellS. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 347–360). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.*
9.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1997). Self-regulation and writing: Where do we go from here?Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 102–114.
10.
GrahamS.HarrisK. R.TroiaG. A. (1998). Writing and self-regulation: Cases from the self-regulated strategy development model. In SchunkD. H.ZimmermanB. J. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practices (pp. 20–41). New York: Guilford Press.*
11.
GrahamS.MacArthurC.SchwartzS. (1995). The effects of goal setting and procedural facilitation on the revising behavior and writing performance of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 230–240.
12.
GrahamS.MacArthurC.SchwartzS.PageV. (1992). Improving the compositions of students with learning disabilities using a strategy involving product and process goal setting. Exceptional Children, 58, 322–334.
13.
GravesA.MontagueM.WongY. (1990). The effects of procedural facilitation on story composition of learning disabled students. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 5, 88–93.
14.
HarrisK. R.GrahamS. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.*
15.
HarrisK. R.GrahamS.ReidR.McElroyK.HambyR. (1994). Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 121–139.
16.
MacArthurC.GrahamS. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing with three methods: Handwriting, dictation, and word processing. Journal of Special Education, 21, 22–42.
17.
McCutchenD. (1988). “Functional automaticity” in children's writing. Written Communication, 5, 306–324.
18.
MontagueM.GravesA.LeavellA. (1991). Planning, procedural facilitation, and narrative composition of junior high students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6, 219–224.
19.
SalomonG.GlobersonT. (1987). Skill may not be enough: The role of mindfulness in learning and transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 623–637.
20.
SalomonG.PerkinsD. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24, 113–142.
21.
SawyerR.GrahamS.HarrisK. R. (1992). Direct teaching, strategy instruction, and strategy instruction with explicit self-regulation: Effects on learning disabled students' composition skills and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 340–352.
22.
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). New York: Academic Press.*
23.
SextonM.HarrisK. R.GrahamS. (1998). The effects of self-regulated strategy development on essay writing and attributions of students with LD in a process writing setting. Exceptional Children, 64, 295–311.
24.
ShatnerW.KreskiC. (1994). Star Trek: Movie memories. New York: Harper Collins.*
25.
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.
26.
VallecrosaA.GarrisE. (1990). Story composition skills of middle-grade students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 57, 48–55.
27.
WongB. (1994). Instructional parameters promoting transfer of learned strategies in students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 110–120.
28.
WongB. (1997). Research on genre-specific strategies in enhancing writing in adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 140–159.
