Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the skills and types of instruction present within four commonly used writing textbooks at grades four and five via content and quantitative analyses. Determining the presence of standards-based skills and evidence-based practices may help shed light on the effectiveness and quality of these curricula. The textbooks under investigation included HMH Into Reading Texas for grades 4 and 5 (HMH; Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2020), and Texas myView Literacy for grades 4 and 5 (Pearson; Pearson Education, 2020). Findings indicated a lack of focus on composing for a variety of purposes, and a lack of explicit modeling instruction across all textbooks. The majority of activities appeared to be independent student work. Conclusions and recommendations for future research are provided with an emphasis on what is known about evidence-based instruction, and what needs to be included in writing textbooks for student achievement to improve.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bangert-Drowns, R., Hurley, M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing to-learn interventions on Academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 29–58. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001029.
Beerwinkle, A. L., Owens, J., & Hudson, A. (2021). An analysis of comprehension strategies and skills covered within Grade 3–5 reading textbooks in the United States. Technology Knowledge and Learning, 26, 311–338.
Bridge, C. A., & Hiebert, E. H. (1985). A comparison of classroom writing practices, teachers’ perceptions of their writing instruction, and textbook recommendations on writing practices. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 155–172.
Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4?6: A national survey. The Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 494–518.
Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing science, social Studies, and mathematics: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90, 179–226.
Graham, S., Kiuhara, S., & MacKay, M. (2020). The effects of writing on learning in instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of educational psychology, 104(4), 879–896.
Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., & MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D. Olinghouse, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide, & Washington, D. C. : National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, N. C. E. E., Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practicegu.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2017). Self-regulated strategy development: Theoretical Bases critical instructional Elements, and future research. Design Principles for Teaching Effective, & Writing, 119–151. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004270480_007.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (2020). Into Reading (Texas edition, grade 4 and grade 5).
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in. history/social Studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
Pearson Education (2020). Texas myView Literacy (Grade 4 and grade 5).
Tavsanli, O. F., Sadioglu, O., Sezer, G. O., & Kaldirim, A. (2020). An investigation into how parental literacy experiences are reflected in literacy tendencies and experiences of preservice teachers. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(5), 138–159.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix A
Appendix A
HMH total modules 1–12 counts and percentages by category
Skill Category | Grade 4 | Grade 5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | |
Writing Process | 226 | 33.48 | 305 | 38.41 |
Revision | 37 | 5.48 | 40 | 5.04 |
Editing | 53 | 7.85 | 85 | 10.71 |
Composition Genres | 127 | 18.81 | 163 | 20.53 |
Reading Response Skills | 232 | 34.37 | 201 | 25.31 |
Pearson total units 1–5 counts and percentages by category
Skill Category | Grade 4 | Grade 5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | |
Writing Process | 170 | 26.15 | 199 | 29.70 |
Revision | 18 | 2.77 | 17 | 2.54 |
Editing | 215 | 33.08 | 195 | 29.10 |
Composition Genres | 116 | 17.85 | 115 | 17.16 |
Reading Response Skills | 131 | 20.15 | 144 | 21.49 |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Camping, A., Stack, A., Bristow, A. et al. An Analysis of Student Skills and Teacher Practices Across Writing Textbooks in Grades 4 and 5. Tech Know Learn (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09691-5
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09691-5