The present study examined the effect of technology‐based writing instruction on writing outcomes using meta‐analytic methods. Additionally, this study investigated whether characteristics of study, sample, and outcome moderated the effect of technology‐based writing instruction. Six studies were coded resulting in 11 extracted effect sizes. Results revealed that the weighted average effect size for technology‐based writing instruction was 0.28, suggesting an educationally relevant and impactful effect of education technology on writing outcomes. Several moderators were included in this meta‐analysis, but did not significantly influence effect sizes. One exception was learning disability (LD) status; however, these results should be interpreted with caution as only one study included an LD sample. Overall, these results support previous research and provide knowledge of the populations that are potentially impacted by technology‐based writing instruction. Previous literature suggests technology‐based writing instruction may supplement teachers’ efforts to deliver instruction and provide practice time to students, affording students extra opportunities to engage with writing both in and out of the classroom; however, more research is required to determine the exact mechanisms through which technology may impact writing skills. Recommendations for reporting techniques and directions for future research in development and implementation of technology‐based writing instruction are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to examine second graders’ (n=680) changing spoken nonmainstream American English (NMAE) use in relation to their oral language and reading comprehension achievement. Fall NMAE production was negatively associated with fall achievement scores. NMAE production generally decreased from fall to spring. Students who qualified for the US Free and Reduced Lunch program (FARL) and who had stronger language skills were more likely to decrease their NMAE use (i.e., dialect shifting) than their peers who did not qualify for FARL or their peers with weaker language skills. Dialect shifting for a sub-sample of 102 students who used substantial amounts of NMAE at the beginning of the school year was predicted by school context, controlling for reading and language skills – in general, students who attended more affluent schools dialect shifted to a greater extent than did their peers who attended higher poverty schools. Greater dialect shifting in this group predicted gains in reading comprehension from fall to spring.

I t is day two of Mrs. L's weekly science lesson and the "explain" day of the learning cycle. Students are reading the book Earthworms Underground (Beals, 2007) within their groups. Mrs. L is working closely with students in one particular group, because they need more scaffolding to complete their lab sheets; students in other groups are working together independently. Yesterday, the class recorded their observations of live earthworms as part of their "explore" day. This is a high-poverty school with limited resources for classroom supplies, so many of the students had never observed earthworms so closely. Tomorrow, "elaborate" day, the students will build an earthworm habitat. But before they do, they'll read to learn how earthworms live, eat, breathe, and move about, followed by a discussion in their groups on what materials they think would be the best to put in their classroom's earthworm terrarium. The students have just finished think-pairshare in their groups. Mrs. L: Who can tell me how earthworms breathe? Student A: They breathe through their skin. Mrs. L: Yes, they breathe through their skin. What did we learn about the amount of moisture earthworms need in their habitat? Moisture means water; so, what do we need to remember about the amount of water in an earthworm habitat? Student B: If you put too much water in earthworms' habitat, they will drown. Mrs. L: And if you don't give them enough water? Student C: They will dry out and die.

This guide accompanies the following article: Little, C. W., Clark, J. C., Tani, N. E. & Connor, C. M., (2018) Improving writing skills through technology‐based instruction: a meta‐analysis. Review of Education, https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3114

Aim/Purpose: Using a sample of historically Black college/university (HBCU) students, the study examined (1) differences in academic self-esteem (ASE) levels when considering students’ performance on an academic task that was either easy (low in cognitive demand) or difficult (high in cognitive demand), (2) gender differences in ASE levels, and (3) variations in academic self-concepts, given baseline general self-esteem levels, GPA, academic performance (AP), and perceptions of task difficulty. Background: This study is the first to date which examines African American students' ASE differences as a result of academic performance and perceptions of task rigor. The optimal arousal theory serves as a framework for the study design; the study utilized a manipulation of the cognitive demand task condition as a means of investigating ASE. Given the mixed and limited literature on gender differences in African American/HBCU subjects, gender differences were explored. Methodology: Quantitative analyses of systematically-built surveys and assessments allowed for the examination of participants (n = 410 HBCU student; 303 females). Correlations, analyses of variance, and regression analyses were completed to address research aims. Contribution: A novel approach to examining ASE variants within African American students matriculating through an HBCU context is provided. Findings: Students in the Low Cognitive Demand task condition displayed significantly higher levels of academic self-esteem (ASE) than High Cognitive Demand task participants; males yielded marginally higher academic self-esteem levels than females (M = 54.21, M = 51.58; p = .04); and while academic performance marginally predicted ASE levels, most of the variance was attributed to baseline self-esteem levels and subjects’ perceptions of task rigor. Recommendations for Practitioners: Educational stakeholders, namely, teachers and administrators, are advised to contemplate the importance of students’ perceptions of task difficulty and feasibility and the possible impacts on academic self-concepts. Additionally, educators may consider students’ initial self-concepts when deciding how and when to provide feedback on academic performance. Recommendation for Researchers: Self-esteem levels are likely to vary as a result of other self-concepts (e.g., motivational, personal, and contextual factors) that were not examined. As such, the study findings provide clarity on varying ASE levels within the specific sample and should be taken with care. Impact on Society: Increasing our understanding of what negatively or positively impacts academic self-esteem levels in students will further aid our ability to foster stronger scholastic self-concepts in the generations to come. Future Research: Future research should examine ASE levels and the extent that perceptions of task rigor impact varying self-esteem levels in African American students enrolled at more racially-heterogenous higher educational contexts (e.g., primarily White institutions, Hispanic serving institutions).