No abstract

A random sample of language arts, social studies, and science high school teachers (N = 361; 53% women) from the United States were surveyed about what their students wrote, their use of evidence-based writing practices, the adaptations they made for weaker writers, how they assessed writing, their preparation to teach writing, beliefs about the importance of writing, and judgments about their students’ writing capabilities. The findings from this survey raised some concerns about the quality of high school writing instruction. The writing activities they were assigned most frequently by teachers involved little analysis and interpretation, and almost one half of the participating teachers did not assign at least one multiparagraph writing assignment monthly. Although the majority of high school teachers did apply most of the evidence-based practices and adaptations included in the survey, they used these practices infrequently. Most teachers did not believe their college teacher education program adequately prepared them to teach writing. A sizable minority of language arts and social studies teachers indicated that their in-service preparation was inadequate too. For science teachers this was close to 60%.

No abstract

This meta-analysis examined if students writing about content material in science, social studies, and mathematics facilitated learning ( k = 56 experiments). Studies in this review were true or quasi-experiments (with pretests), written in English, and conducted with students in Grades 1 to 12 in which the writing-to-learn activity was part of instruction. Studies were not included if the control condition used writing to support learning (except when treatment students spent more time engaging in writing-to-learn activities), study attrition exceeded 20%, instructional time and content coverage differed between treatment and control conditions, pretest scores approached ceiling levels, letter grades were the learning outcome, and students attended a special school for students with disabilities. As predicted, writing about content reliably enhanced learning (effect size = 0.30). It was equally effective at improving learning in science, social studies, and mathematics as well as the learning of elementary, middle, and high school students. Writing-to-learn effects were not moderated by the features of writing activities, instruction, or assessment. Furthermore, variability in obtained effects were not related to features of study quality. Directions for future research and implications for practice are provided.

No abstract