Teachers’ Voices: Perceptions of Effective Professional Development and Classwide Implementation of Self-Regulated Strategy Development in Writing

Abstract

Despite consensus regarding critical design elements for professional development (PD), numerous PD studies have not shown anticipated effects for teachers or students. Mixed methods studies investigating when and why PD is successful are needed. The qualitative study reported here was part of a larger, mixed methods study of PD for self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) in writing; the randomized controlled trial found significant and meaningful outcomes for teachers and students. In the current qualitative study, 14 Grades 2 and 3 teachers discussed semistructured, open-ended questions in small focus groups regarding their experiences with, reactions to, and evaluations of aspects and components of PD and SRSD. These teachers’ voices contribute to our understanding of critical aspects of effective PD as well as SRSD.

Using the SRSD Instructional Approach for Argumentative Writing: A Look across the Content Areas

“…The SRSD model includes six stages to teach students effective writing practices-Develop Background Knowledge, Discuss It, Model It, Memorize It, Support It, and Independent Performance. See McKeown et al (2017) in this special issue for a description of each stage. A critical element to remember is that the SRSD instructional approach is the mechanism of action, or important element, that improves student performance, not the specific strategy or mnemonic used.…”

Through the looking glass: Reflections of a writing scholar

“…composing via dictation, slow dictation, and handwriting), and traditional reviews and meta-analysis. In studying other aspects of writing including writing strategies, writing motivation, writing knowledge, and how to assess writing, we have applied case studies and qualitative methods (e.g., MacArthur et al, 1996;McKeown et al, 2019), interviews (e.g., Graham et al, 1993), generalizability theory (Graham et al, 1996), Rasch analyses (Graham et al, in press), confirmatory factor analyses , and survey methodology (Cutler & Graham, 2008) to provide some additional examples. I hope this makes it clear how important it is to be able to draw upon multiple approaches and tools when studying a complex phenomenon like writing.…”

SRSD in Writing and Professional Development for Teachers: Practice and Promise for Elementary and Middle School Students with Learning Disabilities

“…Throughout SRSD instruction, students discuss their goals, share and reflect on their progress, and participate in collaborative writing experiences with teachers and peers (Harris & Graham, in press;McKeown et al, 2016). SRSD instruction is guided by six flexible and recursive stages (see Table 1) during which students learn (a) general strategies for powerful writing (e.g., consider topic, audience, and purpose; use effective openings, vocabulary, and endings); (b) strategies for writing in the target genre (e.g., narrative, persuasive/argumentative, expository); and (c) the knowledge necessary (e.g., background knowledge, vocabulary) to use these strategies Harris & Graham, in press;McKeown et al, 2017). Embedded in the stages of SRSD, in addition, is instruction in strategies for self-regulating the writing process, including setting goals, using self-instructions to help manage the writing process, monitoring and self-assessment, and reflecting on growth r Read examples of the genre, discussing genre-specific vocabulary, genre elements, and choices made by the authors.…”

“…Harris and colleagues (Festas et al, 2015;Harris et al, 2012;Harris et al, 2015;McKeown et al, 2016;McKeown et al, 2017) have examined PBPD for SRSD in five published studies and continue to study its impacts. In each of these studies, PBPD for SRSD was recursive and highly interactive, with professional learning occurring at a pace to meet teachers' needs (Harris et al, 2012).…”

“…Teachers read articles on SRSD and filled out a survey of writing practices. They were asked to reflect on their current writing practices and instruction, their writing curriculum, and the writing of students in their classrooms (Harris et al, 2012;Harris et al, 2015;McKeown et al, 2016;McKeown et al, 2017).…”