A Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades

被引:464
作者
Graham, Steve [1 ]
McKeown, Debra [2 ]
Kiuhara, Sharlene [3 ]
Harris, Karen R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers Coll, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[2] Georgia State Univ, Sch Educ, Atlanta, GA 30303 USA
[3] Westminster Coll, Sch Educ, Fulton, MO 65251 USA
关键词
writing; composition; meta-analysis; instruction; elementary grades; STRUGGLING YOUNG WRITERS; STRATEGY INSTRUCTION; COMPOSITION SKILLS; SELF-REGULATION; PROCEDURAL FACILITATION; EFFICACY; MODEL; GOALS; INTERVENTION; DISABILITIES;
D O I
10.1037/a0029185
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
In an effort to identify effective instructional practices for teaching writing to elementary grade students, we conducted a meta-analysis of the writing intervention literature, focusing our efforts on true and quasi-experiments. We located 115 documents that included the statistics for computing an effect size (ES). We calculated an average weighted ES for 13 writing interventions. To be included in the analysis, a writing intervention had to be tested in 4 studies. Six writing interventions involved explicitly teaching writing processes, skills, or knowledge. All but 1 of these interventions (grammar instruction) produced a statistically significant effect: strategy instruction (ES = 1.02), adding self-regulation to strategy instruction (ES = 0.50), text structure instruction (ES = 0.59), creativity/imagery instruction (ES = 0.70), and teaching transcription skills (ES = 0.55). Four writing interventions involved procedures for scaffolding or supporting students' writing. Each of these interventions produced statistically significant effects: prewriting activities (ES = 0.54), peer assistance when writing (ES = 0.89), product goals (ES = 0.76), and assessing writing (0.42). We also found that word processing (ES = 0.47), extra writing (ES = 0.30), and comprehensive writing programs (ES = 0.42) resulted in a statistically significant improvement in the quality of students' writing. Moderator analyses revealed that the self-regulated strategy development model (ES = 1.17) and process approach to writing instruction (ES = 0.40) improved how well students wrote.
引用
收藏
页码:879 / 896
页数:18
相关论文
共 137 条
[1]  
Alexander PA, 1997, ADV MOTIV A, V10, P213
[2]  
Anderson A.A., 1997, THESIS U HOUSTON HOU
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2010, COMM COR STAT STAND
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2008, 2008468 NCES
[5]  
[Anonymous], THESIS U ALBERTA EDM
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2011, FOCUS EXCEPT CHILD
[7]   The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis [J].
Bangert-Drowns, RL ;
Hurley, MM ;
Wilkinson, B .
REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 2004, 74 (01) :29-58
[9]   Tier 1 and Tier 2 early intervention for handwriting and composing [J].
Berninger, VW ;
Rutberg, JE ;
Abbott, RD ;
Garcia, N ;
Anderson-Youngstrom, M ;
Brooks, A ;
Fulton, C .
JOURNAL OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 44 (01) :3-30
[10]   Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing [J].
Berninger, VW ;
Vaughan, K ;
Abbott, RD ;
Begay, K ;
Coleman, KB ;
Curtin, G ;
Hawkins, JM ;
Graham, S .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 94 (02) :291-304