In this randomized controlled study, 20 second- and third-grade teachers participated in practice-based professional development in strategies instruction in either story or opinion essay writing, using the Self-Regulated Strategies Development (SRSD) instructional model. These teachers worked in schools collaborating with a local university to implement an evidence-based, three-tiered model of prevention and supports targeting academic, behavioral, and social goals. The authors examined the effects of intensive practice-based professional development and follow-up support on the writing of second- and third-grade students in terms of quality, length, and inclusion of basic genre elements; integrity of SRSD instruction; and teacher and student judgments of the social validity of SRSD. Whole-class (Tier 1), teacher-implemented SRSD instruction resulted in significant and meaningful changes in student writing outcomes for story and opinion essay writing. Teachers implemented SRSD with fidelity, and SRSD was viewed as socially valid by teachers and students. Limitations of this study and directions for future research are discussed.

No abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

No abstract

The authors examined the utility of a modified version of the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders for use at the high school level to address issues of comorbidity. Results suggested that the modified version was able to discriminate among students with varying degrees of risk in terms of academic performance as measured by GPA. In terms of convergent validity, teachers were able to differentiate between the social skills of students rated with typical behaviors and those at risk for externalizing or comorbid behaviors in terms of cooperation, self-control, school adjustment, and empathy skills. Furthermore, teachers were better able to discriminate externalizing behaviors relative to internalizing behaviors. Overall, solely relying on teacher nominations may be sufficient for discriminating between the presence versus absence of risk. However, it may not be sufficient to discriminate among the presence of different types of risk, particularly internalizing behaviors. Limitations and educational implications are discussed.