Making sense of fractions is critical for building the mathematical competence of upper elementary students with and at-risk for a mathematics learning disability. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of teaching students with and at-risk for learning disabilities an intervention in which they learned to construct written arguments to develop their fraction knowledge. We sequenced the intervention using the 6 stages of Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD). The effects were tested using a pre-posttest cluster-randomized controlled trial in which 10 teachers were randomly assigned to treatment and control conditions. Measures included a far-learning fraction test and proximal writing measures that assessed quality of mathematical reasoning, total number of rhetorical elements, and total words written. Teachers in the treatment condition received 2 days of professional development before implementing the six-lesson intervention, 3-4 times per week for 30-45 min. Clustering effects were corrected to examine differences in pretest-to-posttest change scores using individual scores for students in the SRSD group (n = 28) and control (n = 31). Results favored students in the SRSD condition from pre- to posttest on fraction test (g = 0.60); quality of mathematical reasoning (g = 1.82); number of rhetorical elements (g = 3.20), and total words written (g = 1.92). Special education students in the SRSD condition (n = 16) demonstrated greater gains in fraction scores from pretest to posttest compared to their nondisabled peers (n = 12, g = 1.04). The findings from this study support the genre knowledge hypothesis of writing-to-learn.

A random sample of language arts, social studies, and science middle school teachers from the United States were surveyed about their preparation to teach writing, beliefs about responsibilities for teaching writing, use of evidence-based writing practices, assessment of writing, use of technology, and adaptations for struggling writers. The findings from this survey raised concerns about the quality of middle school writing instruction. Many teachers believed their preservice and inservice preparation to teach writing was inadequate. Middle school students spend little time writing or being taught how to write. While most teachers used a variety of evidenced-based writing practices and made adaptations for struggling writers, such methods were applied infrequently. Most teachers did not appear to use assessment data to shape how they taught writing, and computers played a relatively minor role in middle school writing instruction. Even though teachers generally agreed that writing was a collective responsibility, language arts teachers placed a greater emphasis on writing instruction than social studies and science teachers.

Since its advent word processing has become a common writing tool, providing potential advantages over writing by hand. Word processors permit easy revision, produce legible characters quickly, and may provide additional supports (e.g., spellcheckers, speech recognition). Such advantages should remedy common difficulties among weaker writers/readers in grades 1–12. Based on 27 studies with weaker writers, 20 of which were not considered in prior reviews, findings from this meta-analysis support this proposition. From 77 independent effects, the following average effects were greater than zero: writing quality (d = 0.52), length (d = 0.48), development/organization of text (d = 0.66), mechanical correctness (d = 0.61), motivation to write (d = 1.42), and preferring word processing over writing by hand (d = 0.64). Especially powerful writing quality effects were associated with word processing programs that provided text quality feedback or prompted planning, drafting, or revising (d = 1.46), although this observation was based on a limited number of studies (n = 3).

We examined the extent to which strategies instruction, using the Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) model, would enhance the writing, engagement during writing, and behavior of 44 second-grade students identified as having behavioral and writing difficulties. This study occurred within a comprehensive, integrated, three-tiered model of prevention that included behavioral, social, and academic components. Students were randomly assigned to an experimental or control condition. Students in the experimental condition received SRSD as a Tier 2 intervention. They were individually taught strategies for planning and composing, first for opinion essays and then for stories. Students met with their instructor 3 to 4 times per week for 30-min sessions, spending 3 to 4 1/2 weeks in intervention for each genre. Students in the control group received the regular writing program. SRSD instructed students made significantly greater gains in writing quality and composition elements than control students for both opinion essays and stories. Students in the experimental condition also made greater gains than controls in academic engagement when writing opinion essays in their regular classroom. Transfer and behavioral effects, however, were limited. Implications are discussed.

A meta-analysis of vocabulary interventions in grades pre-K to 12 was conducted with 37 studies to better understand the impact of vocabulary on comprehension. Vocabulary instruction was found to be effective at increasing students' ability to comprehend text with custom measures (d = 0.50), but was less effective for standardized measures (d = 0.10). When considering only custom measures, and controlling for method variables, students with reading difficulties (d = 1.23) benefited more than three times as much as students without reading problems (d = 0.39) on comprehension measures. Gains on vocabulary measures, however, were comparable across reading ability. In addition, the correlation of vocabulary and comprehension effects from studies reporting both outcomes was modest (r = .43).

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to synthesize findings from 42 interventions (randomized control trials and quasi-experimental studies) on instructional approaches that enhance the mathematics proficiency of students with learning disabilities. We examined the impact of four categories of instructional components: (a) approaches to instruction and/or curriculum design, (b) formative assessment data and feedback to teachers on students' mathematics performance, (c) formative data and feedback to students with LD on their performance, and (d) peer-assisted mathematics instruction. All instructional components except for student feedback with goal-setting and peer-assisted learning within a class resulted in significant mean effects ranging from 0.21 to 1.56. We also examined the effectiveness of these components conditionally, using hierarchical multiple regressions. Two instructional components provided practically and statistically important increases in effect size–teaching students to use heuristics and explicit instruction. Limitations of the study, suggestions for future research, and applications for improvement of current practice are discussed.

Students with writing difficulties often struggle with the planning, composing, and revising skills required for effective writing. Fortunately, researchers have documented that explicit, interactive, scaffolded development of powerful composing strategies and strategies for self-regulating the writing process, as in Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) instruction, results in improved student performance across writing genres. In addition, SRSD has had significant and meaningful effects among students with learning disabilities (LD) in both elementary and secondary settings. In this article, examples of SRSD instruction for planning, composing, and revision are described. Promising findings of recent research for students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are also highlighted. Finally, tips for effective classroom implementation are provided.

Primary grade teachers randomly selected from across the United Sates completed a survey (N = 168) that examined their instructional practices in spelling and the types of adaptations they made for struggling spellers. Almost every single teacher surveyed reported teaching spelling, and the vast majority of respondents implemented a complex and multifaceted instructional program that applied a variety of research-supported procedures. Although some teachers were sensitive to the instructional needs of weaker spellers and reported making many different adaptations for these students, a sizable minority of teachers (42%) indicated they made few or no adaptations. In addition, the teachers indicated that 27% of their students experienced difficulty with spelling, calling into question the effectiveness of their instruction with these children.