The simple view of writing (SVW) and its expansions provide a strong basis for the psychoeducational assessment of written expression and were an influence on the development of the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, 4th Edition (WIAT-4). Consequentially, it is important to determine the degree to which the relationship between components of the SVW and writing tasks within the WIAT-4 conform to expectations from the framework. Regression modeling indicated that transcription and oral language skills explain significant variance in WIAT-4 writing tasks, although writing performance on the WIAT-4 appears largely based on transcription skills. Nevertheless, effects appear to vary based on task type and age group. Implications for the interpretation of the WIAT-4 are discussed.
BerningerV. W. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511269
4.
BerningerV. W.AbbottR. D. (2010). Listening comprehension, oral expression, reading comprehension, and written expression: Related yet unique language systems in grades 1, 3, 5, and 7. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 635–651. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019319
5.
BerningerV. W.VaughanK.AbbottR. D.BegayK.ColemanK. B.CurtinG.HawkinsJ. M.GrahamS. (2002). Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.291
6.
BerningerV. W.WinnW. D. (2006). Implications of advancements in brain research and technology for writing development, writing instruction, and educational evolution. In MacArthurC.GrahamS.FitzgeraldJ. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 96–114). Guilford Press.
7.
BreauxK. C. (2010). WIAT-III technical manual with adult norms. Pearson.
8.
BreauxK. C. (2020). Wechsler individual achievement test. Technical and interpretive manual (4th Ed.). NCS Pearson.
9.
BurnhamK. P.AndersonD. R. (2002). Model selection and multi-model inference: A practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed.). Springer.
10.
CattsH. W. (2018). The simple view of reading: Advancements and false impressions. Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 317–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518767563
11.
ConnellyV.DockrellJ. E.WalterK.CrittenS. (2012). Predicting the quality of composition and written language bursts from oral language, spelling, and handwriting skills in children with and without specific language impairment. Written Communication, 29(3), 278–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451109
12.
DockrellJ. E.ConnellyV. (2009a). The impact of oral language skills on the production of written text. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2(6), 45–62.
13.
DockrellJ. E.LindsayG.ConnellyV. (2009b). The impact of specific language impairment on adolescents’ written text. Exceptional Children, 75(4), 427–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290907500403
14.
GrahamS.BañalesG.AhumadaS.MuñozP.AlvarezP.HarrisK. R. (2020). Writing strategies interventions. In Handbook of strategies and strategic processing (pp. 141–158). Routledge.
15.
GrahamS.BerningerV. W.AbbottR. D.AbbottS. P.WhitakerD. (1997). Role of mechanics in composing of elementary school students: A new methodological approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.170
16.
HajovskyD. B.NiilekselaC. R.OlsenS. C.SekulaM. K. (2023). Do cognitive–achievement relations vary by general ability level?Journal of Intelligence, 11(9), 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11090177
17.
HayesJ. R.BerningerV. W. (2009). Relationships between idea generation and transcription: How the act of writing shapes what children write. In Traditions of writing research. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203892329
18.
JuelC. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 437–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.437
19.
KatusicS. K.ColliganR. C.WeaverA. L.BarbaresiW. J. (2009). The forgotten learning disability: Epidemiology of written-language disorder in a population-based birth cohort (1976–1982), Rochester, Minnesota. Pediatrics, 123(5), 1306–1313. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-2098
20.
KeithT. Z. (2019). Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315162348
21.
KentS. C.WanzekJ. (2016). The relationship between component skills and writing quality and production across developmental levels: A meta-analysis of the last 25 years. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 570–601. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315619491
22.
KimY. S. G. (2022). Co-occurrence of reading and writing difficulties: The application of the interactive dynamic literacy model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 55(6), 447–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211060868
23.
KimY. S. G. (2024). Writing fluency: Its relations with language, cognitive, and transcription skills, and writing quality using longitudinal data from kindergarten to grade 2. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(4), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000841
24.
KimY.-S. G.GatlinB.Al OtaibaS.WanzekJ. (2018). Theorization and an empirical investigation of the component-based and developmental text writing fluency construct. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51(4), 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219417712016
25.
KimY. S. G.GrahamS. (2022). Expanding the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW): Reading–writing relations, and dynamic relations as a function of measurement/dimensions of written composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(2), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000564
26.
KimY. S. G.SchatschneiderC. (2017). Expanding the developmental models of writing: A direct and indirect effects model of developmental writing (DIEW). Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000129
27.
MattaM. (2024). Assessing an extended version of the not-so-simple view of writing model in school-aged students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 42(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231211965
28.
NCS Pearson. (2020). Wechsler individual achievement test (4th ed.).
29.
OdegardT. N.FarrisE. A.WashingtonJ. A. (2022). Exploring boundary conditions of the listening comprehension-reading comprehension discrepancy index. Annals of Dyslexia, 72(2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-021-00250-0
30.
ParkinJ. R. (2021a). The simple views of reading and writing: Frameworks for interpretation of the woodcock–Johnson IV. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39(7), 832–847. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829211023325
31.
ParkinJ. R. (2021b). The simple views of reading and writing in the Kaufman test of educational achievement. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39(5), 563–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282921999481
32.
ParkinJ. R.FrisbyC. L.WangZ. (2020). Operationalizing the simple view of writing with the wechsler individual achievement test, 3rd edition. Contemporary School Psychology, 24(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-019-00246-z
33.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org
SeoaneR. C.WangJ.CaoY.KimY.-S. G. (2025). Unpacking the relation between oral language and written composition: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 0(0), 00346543251320359. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543251320359
