The present study was conducted to determine whether self-instructional strategy training would be effective in improving learning disabled students' revising behavior and the essays they compose on a word processor. Training effects were investigated using a multiple baseline across subjects design, with multiple probes in baseline. Results indicated that strategy instruction had a positive effect on students' revising behavior as well as on the length and quality of their written products. Effects were maintained over time and generalization to a paper-and-pencil writing task was also demonstrated. Following training, students reported that they were more confident in their ability to write and revise essays. Additionally, evidence on strategy usage and modification was collected.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
2.
Bridwell, L. S., Nancarrow, P. R., & Ross, D. (1984). The writing process and the writing machine: Current research on word processors relevant to the teaching of composition. In R. B. Beach & L. S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research (pp. 381–398). New York: Guilford Press.
3.
Brown, A., Bransford, J., Ferrara, R., & Campione, J. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavel & E. Markham (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 3, Cognitive development) (pp. 77–166). New York: Wiley.
4.
Daiute, C.A. (1983). The computer as stylus and audience. College Composition and Communication, 34, 134–145.
5.
Daiute, C. A. (1985). Writing and computers.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
6.
Graham, S. (1982). Composition research and practice: A unified approach. Focus on Exceptional Children, 14, 1–16.
7.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1987a). A components analysis of cognitive strategy training: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Manuscript submitted for publication.
8.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1987b). Improving composition skills of inefficient learners with self-instructional strategy training. Topics in Language Disorders, 7, 66–77.
9.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1988). Improving learning disabled students' skills at generating essays: Self-instructional strategy training. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
10.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (in press). Cognitive training: Implications for written language. In J. Hughes & R. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive behavioral approaches in educational settings.New York: Guilford Press.
11.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Sawyer, R. (1987). Composition instruction with learning disabled students: Self-instructional strategy training. Focus on Exceptional Children, 20, 1–11.
12.
Graham, S., & MacArthur, C. (1987). Written language of the handicapped. In C. Reynolds & L. Mann (Eds.), Encyclopedia of special education (pp. 1678–1681). New York: Wiley.
13.
Harris, K. R. (1982). Cognitive-behavior modification: Application with exceptional students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 15, 1–16.
14.
Harris, K. R. (1985). Conceptual, methodological, and clinical issues in cognitive-behavioral assessment. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 13, 373–390.
15.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1985). Improving learning disabled students' composition skills: Self-control strategy training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 8, 27–36.
16.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1988). Self-instructional strategy training: Improving writing skills among educationally handicapped students. Teaching Exceptional Students, 20, 35–37.
17.
Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Freeman, S. (1988). The effects of strategy training and study conditions on metamemory among learning disabled students. Exceptional Children, 54, 332–338.
18.
Hayes, J., & Flower, L. (1986). Writing research and the writer. American Psychologist, 41, 1106–1113.
19.
MacArthur, C., & Graham, S. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing, and dictation. The Journal of Special Education, 21, 22–42.
20.
MacArthur, C. A., Haynes, J. A., Malouf, D. B., & Dreifuss, S. (1985). Implementation of microcomputers in educational programs for mildly handicapped students (Tech. Report 107). College Park: University of Maryland, Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children and Youth.
21.
MacArthur, C. A., & Shneiderman, B. (1986). Learning disabled students' difficulties in learning to use a word processor: Implications for instruction and software evaluation. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 248–253.
22.
Moran, M., Schumaker, J., & Vetter, A. (1981). Teaching a paragraph organization strategy to learning disabled adolescents (Research Report No. 54). Lawrence: University of Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.
23.
Pea, R. D., & Kurland, M., (1984). Toward cognitive technologies for writing (Tech. Report No. 30). New York: Bank Street College of Education.
24.
Purves, A. (1985). Composition instruction. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education: Research and studies (pp. 910–919). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
25.
Schumaker, J., Deshler, D., Alley, G., Warner, M., Clark, F., & Nolan, S. (1982). Error monitoring: A learning strategy for improving adolescent performance. In W. M. Cruickshank & J. W. Lerner (Eds.), Best of ACLD (Vol. 3, pp. 170–183). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
26.
Schunk, D. (1983). Developing children's self-efficacy and skills: The roles of social comparative information and goal setting. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 6–86.
27.
Schunk, D. (1985). Participation in goal setting; Effects on self-efficacy and skills of learning-disabled children. The Journal of Special Education, 19, 307–317.
28.
Thomas, C., Englert, C., & Gregg, S. (1987). An analysis of errors and strategies in the expository writing of learning disabled students. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 21–30.
