This article describes three years of research in intensive long-term writing intervention with adolescents with learning disabilities (LD) and low achievement. The rationale, the process of strategy development, the intervention procedures, and data obtained are all summarized, and research and practical implications presented. More important, reflections on the interventions are offered that may resonate with other intervention researchers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlachmanB. (1992). What we have learned from longitudinal studies of phonological processing and reading, and some unanswered questions: A response to Torgesen, Wagner, and Rashotte. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27 (5), 287–291.
2.
BorkowskiJ.G.DayJ.D.SaenzD.DietmeyerD.EstradaT.M.GroteluschenA. (1992). Expanding the boundaries of cognitive interventions. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Contemporary intervention research in learning disabilities (pp. 1–21). New York: Springer-Verlag.
3.
BorkowskiJ.G.EstradaM.T.MilsteadM.HaleC.A. (1989). General problem-solving skills: Relations between metacognition and strategic processing. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12 (1), 57–70.
4.
EnglertC.S. (1992). Writing instruction from a sociocultural perspective: The holistic, dialogic, and social enterprise of writing. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Cognitive process-based instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(3), 153–172.
5.
EnglertC.S.RaphaelT.E.FearK.L.AndersonL.M. (1988). Students' metacognitive knowledge about how to write informational texts. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11 (1), 18–46.
6.
EnglertS.E.RaphaelT.E.MariageT.V. (1994). Developing a school-based discourse for literacy learning: A principled search for understanding. Learning Disability Quarterly, 17 (1), 2–32.
7.
EnglertC.S.ThomasC.C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10 (2), 93–105.
8.
FlowerL.S.HayesJ.R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In GreggL.W.SteinbergE.R. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9.
GrahamS.HarrisK.R. (1992). Self-instructional strategy development: Programmatic research in writing. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Contemporary intervention research in learning disabilities: An instructional perspective (pp. 47–64). New York: Springer-Verlag.
10.
GrahamS.HarrisK.R. (1993). Teaching writing strategies to students with learning disabilities: Issues and recommendations. In MeltzerL.J. (Ed.), Strategy assessment and instruction for students with learning disabilities: From theory to practice (pp. 271–292). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
11.
GrahamS.HarrisK. (1994). The role and development of self-regulation in the writing process. In SchunkD.H.ZimmermanB.J. (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 203–228). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
GrahamS.HarrisK.R.MacArthurC.SchwartzS. (1991). Writing instruction. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (pp. 310–345). San Diego: Academic Press.
13.
GrahamS.SchwartzS.S.MacArthurC.A. (1993). Knowledge of writing and the composing process, attitude toward writing, and self-efficacy for students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26 (4), 237–249.
14.
HarrisK.R.GrahamS. (1992a). Self-regulated strategy development: A part of the writing process. In PressleyM.HarrisK.R.GuthrieJ.T. (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277–309). San Diego: Academic Press.
15.
HarrisK.R.GrahamS. (1992b). Helping young writers master the craft: Strategy instruction and self-regulation in the writing process. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
16.
HouckC.K.BillingsleyB.S. (1989). Written expression of students with and without learning disabilities: Differences across the grades. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22 (9), 561–567, 572.
17.
NewcomerP.L.BarenbaumE.M. (1991). The written composing ability of children with learning disabilities: A review of the literature from 1980 to 1990. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24 (10), 578–593.
18.
PoteetJ.A. (1978). Characteristics of written expression of learning disabled and non-learning disabled elementary school students. Diagnostique, 4, 60–74.
19.
ScardamaliaM.BereiterC. (1987). Knowledge telling and knowledge transforming in written composition. In RosenbergS. (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics: Vol. 2. Reading, writing and language learning (pp. 142–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
SchumakerJ.B.DeshlerD.D. (1992). Validation of learning strategy interventions for students with LD: Results of a programmatic research effort. In WongB.Y.L. (Ed.), Contemporary intervention research in learning disabilities: An international perspective (pp. 22–46). New York: Springer-Verlag.
21.
SchumakerJ.B.NolanS.M.DeshlerD.D. (1985). The error monitoring strategy. Learning strategies curriculum. Lawrence: The University of Kansas.
22.
ThomasK.M. (1993). The effects of the cognitive strategy instruction in writing curriculum (CSIW) on expository writing skills and metacognitive knowledge of the writing process in learning-disabled students. Unpublished master's thesis, Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada.
23.
WongB.Y.L. (1991). Three conceptual perspectives on the connections between reading and writing processes. In LupartJ.McKeoghA. (Eds.), Toward the practice of theory-based instruction: Current cognitive theory and their educational promise (pp. 68–91). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
WongB.Y.L. (1996). The ABC's of learning disabilities. San Diego: Academic Press.
25.
WongB.Y.L.ButlerD.L.FiczereS.A.KuperisS. (1996). Teaching low achievers and students with learning disabilities to plan, write, and revise opinion essays. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29 (2), 197–212.
26.
WongB.Y.L.ButlerD.L.FiczereS.A.KuperisS. (1997). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities and low achievers to plan, write, and revise compare and contrast essays. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 12 (1), 2–15.
27.
WongB.Y.L.ButlerD.L.FiczereS.A.KuperisS.CordenM. (1994). Teaching problem learners revision skills and sensitivity to audience through two instructional modes: student-teacher versus student-student interactive dialogues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9 (2), 78–90.
28.
WongB.Y.L.WongR.BlenkisopJ. (1989). Cognitive and metacognitive aspects of composing problems in learning-disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12 (4), 300–322.
29.
WongB.Y.L.WongR.DarlingtonD.JonesW. (1991). Interactive teaching: An effective way to teach revision skills to adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6 (2), 117–127.
30.
WechslerD. (1974). Manual for the Wechsler intelligence scale for children-revised. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
31.
ZajoncR.B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.
