There is a general consensus that writing is a challenging task for students with learning disabilities (LD). To identify more precisely the extent and depth of the challenges that these students experience with writing, the authors conducted a meta-analysis comparing the writing performance of students with LD to their typically achieving peers. From 53 studies that yielded 138 effect sizes, the authors calculated average weighted effect sizes, showing that students with LD obtained lower scores than their peers on the following writing outcomes: writing quality (–1.06); organization (–1.04); vocabulary (–0.89); sentence fluency (–0.81); conventions of spelling, grammar, and handwriting (–1.14); genre elements (–0.82); output (–0.87); and motivation (–0.42). Implications for research and practice are provided based on these findings.

No abstract

Seventy-six general education and 67 special education teachers working in the same 66 elementary schools were surveyed about their beliefs about writing. Each teacher taught writing to one or more fourth-grade students receiving special education services, including students with learning disabilities. Survey findings indicated that general education teachers believed that they were better prepared to teach writing than special education teachers, and they were more positive about their own efforts to learn to teach writing. General education teachers also held more positive attitudes about teaching writing and their own capabilities as a writer than their special education counterparts. Furthermore, general educators were more likely than special educators to indicate that writing developed through effort and process, and less likely to think that writing knowledge came from experts. Beliefs about adequacy of preparation to teach writing predicted teachers’ beliefs about their level of knowledge to teach writing, efficacy to overcome students’ writing difficulties, and attitudes toward teaching writing. Recommendations for future research and implications for practice are presented.

Researchers have increasingly investigated sources of variance in reading comprehension test scores, particularly with students with reading difficulties (RD). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine if the achievement gap between students with RD and typically developing (TD) students varies as a function of different reading comprehension response formats (e.g., multiple choice, cloze). A systematic literature review identified 82 eligible studies. All studies administered reading comprehension assessments to students with RD and TD students in Grades K-12. Hedge's g standardized mean difference effect sizes were calculated, and random effects robust variance estimation techniques were used to aggregate average weighted effect sizes for each response format. Results indicated that the achievement gap between students with RD and TD students was larger for some response formats (e.g., picture selection ES = -1.80) than others (e.g., retell ES = -0.60). Moreover, for multiple-choice, cloze, and open-ended question response formats, single-predictor metaregression models explored potential moderators of heterogeneity in effect sizes. No clear patterns, however, emerged in regard to moderators of heterogeneity in effect sizes across response formats. Findings suggest that the use of different response formats may lead to variability in the achievement gap between students with RD and TD students.

No abstract