Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 21, Issue 1–2, pp 71–93 | Cite as

Self-regulated strategy development instruction for writing an opinion essay: Effects for six students with emotional/behavior disorders

  • Linda H. Mason
  • James G. Shriner
Article

Abstract

A multiple-probe across-subjects design was used to examine persuasive writing performance of six 2nd- through 5th- grade students with emotional/behavior disorders (EBD). Students’ writing was evaluated before and after self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) instruction for the POW (Pick my idea, Organize my notes, Write and say more) + TREE (Topic sentence, Reasons – three or more, Ending, Examine) strategy. Students’ essays written during and immediately after instruction indicated that the students had learned to write independently a persuasive essay with five parts. Generalization and maintenance performance, however, varied across students and appeared to be associated with behavior as opposed to the inability to transfer or remember the strategy.

Keywords

Behavior Disorders Essay Instruction Strategy writing 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Preparation of this article was funded by Campus Research Board Grant, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. The authors would like to thank Rahul Ganguly, Yore Kedem, Diana Sukrham, and Ray Taft for their support in this project.

References

  1. Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (2005). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (6th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, S., Gertsen, R., & Scanlon, D. (2002). Procedural facilitators and cognitive strategies: Tools for unraveling the mysteries of comprehension and the writing process, and for providing meaningful access to the general curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17, 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1982). From conversation to composition: The role of instruction a developmental process. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Binder, C. (1996). Behavioral fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. The Behavior Analyst, 19, 163–197.Google Scholar
  5. Bos, C. S. (1989). The effects of an interactive instructional strategy for enhancing reading comprehension and content area learning for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 384–390.Google Scholar
  6. Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research (pp. 187–207). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  7. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp 323–344). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  8. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. H. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1999). Programmatic intervention research: Illustrations from the evolution of self-regulated strategy development. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 22, 251–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. H. (2006). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and motivation of struggling writers in second grade: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 295–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. H. (2003). Self-regulated strategy development in the classroom: Part of a balanced approach to writing instruction for students with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 35, 1–16.Google Scholar
  12. Hersen, M., & Barlow, D. H. (1978). Single-case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  13. Horner, R. D., & Baer, D. M. (1978). Multiple-probe technique: A variation of the multiple probe baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ivarie, J. J. (1986). Effects of proficiency rates on later performance of a recall and writing behavior. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 25–30.Google Scholar
  15. Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lane, K. L. (2004). Academic instruction and tutoring interventions for students with emotional/behavioral disorders: 1990 to present . In R. B. Rutherford, M. M. Quinn, & S. R. Mathur (Eds.). Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral disorders (pp. 462–486). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  17. Langer, J., & Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
  18. Mason, L. H. (2006). [Explicit instruction for strategy development in two multi-component expository reading interventions: Effects for students who struggle with comprehension.] Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  19. Mason, L. H., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2002). Every child has a story to tell: Self-regulated strategy development for story writing. Education and Treatment of Children, 25, 496–506.Google Scholar
  20. Mason, L. H., Hickey Snyder, K., Jones, D. P., & Kedem, Y. (2006). TWA + PLANS strategies for expository reading and writing: Effects for nine 4th-grade students. Exceptional Children, 73, 69–89.Google Scholar
  21. Mason, L. H., & Meadan, H. (2006). [Longitudinal effects of self-regulated reading comprehension and writing strategy instruction for 4th grade students who struggle with learning: A components analysis.] Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  22. Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R. (2005) Teaching students with learning problems (7th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  23. Montague, M., Enders, C., & Castro, M. (2005). Academic and behavioral outcomes for students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 84–94.Google Scholar
  24. Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Reid, R., & Nelson, J. R. (2003). Status and trends of academic research for students with emotional disturbance. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nelson, J. R., Benner, G. J., Lane, K. L., & Smith, B. W. (2004). Academic achievement of K-12 students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Exceptional Children, 71, 59–73.Google Scholar
  26. Penno, D. A., Frank, A. R., & Wacker, D. P. (2000). Instructional accommodations for adolescent students with severe emotional for behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 25, 325–343.Google Scholar
  27. Regan, K. S., Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2005). Promoting expressive writing among students with emotional and behavioral disturbance via dialogue journals. Behavioral Disorders, 31, 33–50.Google Scholar
  28. Ruhl, K. L., & Berlinghoff, D. H. (1992). Research on improving behaviorally disordered students’ academic performance: A review of the literature. Behavioral Disorders, 23, 5–17.Google Scholar
  29. Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). The effect of self-evaluation on teaching behavior in classrooms for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. The Journal of Special Education, 35, 161–171.Google Scholar
  30. Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H., & Yoder, P. J. (2002). Examination of the relationship between teacher praise and opportunities to respond for students with EBD to respond to academic requests. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 5–13.Google Scholar
  31. Swanson, H. L. (1989). Central processing strategy difference in gifted, normal achieving, learning disabled, and mentally retarded children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 47, 378–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tawney, J. W., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. New York: Merrill.Google Scholar
  33. Trout, A. L., Nordness, P. D., Pierce, C. D., & Epstein, M. H. (2003). Research on the academic status of children with emotional and behavioral disorders: A review of the literature from 1961 to 2000. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 198–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wong, B. Y. L. (1986). Instructional strategies for enhancing learning disabled students’ reading comprehension and comprehension test performance. Canadian Journal for Exceptional Children, 2, 128–132.Google Scholar
  35. Ysseldyke, S., Nelson, J., Christenson, S., Johnson, D. R., Dennison, A., Triezenberg, H., Sharpe, M., & Hawres, M. (2004). What we know and need to know about the consequences of high-stakes testing of students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 75–94.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.210 CEDAR, Department of Educational and School Psychology and Special EducationThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.University of IllinoisUrbana-ChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations