Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Urban teachers’ implementation of SRSD for persuasive writing following practice-based professional development: positive effects mediated by compromised fidelity

  • Published:
Reading and Writing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Writing allows access to venues often limited by poverty, disabilities, and geography. Promoting writing skills can create bridges to overcome the isolation that often keeps communities from engaging with one another. However, most of the students in the nation’s schools are not capable writers and find the persuasive genres challenging. In this wait-list quasi-experimental study, 25 teachers from four urban schools were assigned to treatment (n = 11) or control conditions (n = 14). Teachers received practice-based professional development to learn to teach self-regulated strategy development for persuasive writing to their 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade students (318 in treatment, 367 in control). Before and after intervention, students wrote to persuasive prompts, which were counterbalanced, and scored for holistic quality, analytic quality, and length. Teachers were observed for fidelity of implementation and focus groups were conducted to assess social validity. Results indicate teachers implemented with adequate, but lower than expected fidelity. Student results indicate SRSD instruction resulted in an increase in writing outcomes above those in the comparison condition, but effect sizes were low (holistic quality ES = 0.15; analytic ES = 0.24; length ES = 0.15). Lower teacher fidelity resulted in more variability in student outcomes. Teachers indicated they found the intervention had a positive effect on students and would use SRSD in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, E. L. (2007). Principles for scaling up: Choosing, measuring effects, and promoting widespread use of educational innovation. In B. Schneider & S. McDonald (Eds.), Scale-up in education: Ideas in principle (Vol. I, pp. 37–54). New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as a learning profession (pp. 3–31). San Francisco: Jossey-Boss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109348479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, C. (1994). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 79–101). London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, G., Curlette, R., Ogletree, S., Dooley, C., Feinberg, J. R., Richardson, H., & Miller, R. (2009). Network for enhancing teacher quality. Funded by U.S. DOE Office of Teacher Quality Partnership Grants (2009–2014) Award # U336S090137-10.

  • Brindle, M., Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2016). Third and fourth grade teacher’s classroom practices in writing: A national survey. Reading and Writing, 29(5), 929–954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9604-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui, Y. N., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2006). The effects of a strategic writing program for students with and without learning disabilities in inclusive fifth grade classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21, 244–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00221.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Loewenberg Ball, D. (2007). Educational innovation and the problem of scale. In B. Schneider & S.-K. McDonald (Eds.), Scale-Up in education: Ideas in Principle (Vol. I, pp. 19–36). New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Loewenberg Ball, D. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 119–142. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737025002119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, B. G., & Odom, S. L. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79, 135. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuenca-Carlino, Y., & Mustian, A. L. (2013). Self-regulated strategy development: Connecting persuasive writing to self-advocacy for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 39(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291303900102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 327–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Express, Learning. (2003). 501 writing prompts. New York, NY: Learning Express.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festas, I., Oliveira, A., Rebelo, J., Damiao, M., Harris, K., & Graham, S. (2015). Professional development in self-regulated strategy development: Effects on the writing performance of eighth grade Portuguese students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FitzPatrick, E. F. (2017). Practice-based professional development for self-regulated strategy development: Teaching students with learning disabilities and other struggling writers to pen informational essays citing text-based evidence in an inclusive setting. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Scholarworks. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/epse_diss/112/.

  • Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4–6: A national survey. The Elementary School Journal, 4, 494–518. https://doi.org/10.1086/651193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, A. S., & Graham, S. (2014). A meta-analysis of writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 80, 454–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914527238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students’ compositions and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 353–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Fink-Chorzempa, B., & MacArthur, C. (2003). Primary grade teachers’ instructional adaptations for struggling writers: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Hebert, M. (2011). It is more than just the message: Presentation effects in scoring writing. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.17161/fec.v44i4.6687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & McKeown, D. (2013). The writing of students with LD and a meta-analysis of SRSD writing intervention studies: Redux. In L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the Common Core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115, 498–522. https://doi.org/10.1086/681964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harn, B., Parisi, D., & Stoolmiller, M. (2013). Balancing fidelity with flexibility and fit: What do we really know about fidelity of implementation in schools? Exceptional Children, 79, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Brindle, M., & Sandmel, K. (2009). Metacognition and students’ writing. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 131–153). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. H. (2003). Self-regulated strategy development in the classroom: Part of a balanced approach to writing instruction for students with disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 35(7), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L., & Friedlander, B. (2008). POWerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Lane, K. L., Driscoll, S. A., Graham, S., Wilson, K., Sandmel, K., et al. (2012a). Tier 1, teacher-implemented self-regulated strategy development for students with and without behavioral challenges: A randomized controlled trial. Elementary School Journal, 113, 160–191. https://doi.org/10.1086/667403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. R., Lane, K. L., Graham, S., Driscoll, S. A., Sandmel, K., Brindle, M., et al. (2012b). Practice-based professional development for self-regulated strategies development in writing: A randomized controlled study. Journal of Teacher Education, 63, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111429005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L. D., Wehby, J. H., Symons, F. J., Moore, T. C., Maggin, D. M., & Sutherland, K. S. (2013). An analysis of preference relative to teacher implementation of intervention. The Journal of Special Education, 48, 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913475872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674039513.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kini, T., & Podolsky, A. (2016). Does teaching experience increase teacher effectiveness? A review of the research. Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/our-work/publications-resources/does-teaching-experience-increase-teacher-effectiveness-review-research.

  • Klingner, J. K., Ahwee, S., & Pilonieta, P. (2003). Barriers and facilitators in scaling up research-based practices. Exceptional Children, 69, 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Limpo, T., & Alves, R. A. (2017). Relating beliefs in writing skill malleability to writing performance: The mediating role of achievement goals and self-efficacy. Journal of Writing Research, 9, 97–125. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Chapman, G., & Carver, D. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs: A new perspective on evidence-based practice. Centre for Juvenile Justice Reform. Washington DC: Georgetown University.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeown, D., Brindle, M., Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Collins, A. A., & Brown, M. J. (2016). Illuminating growth and struggles using mixed methods: Practice-based professional development and coaching for differentiating SRSD instruction in writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9627-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeown, D., Brindle, M., Harris, K. R., Sandmel, K., Steinbrecher, T., Graham, S., Lane, K., & Oakes, W. (2018). Teachers’ voices: Understanding effective practice-based professional development for elementary teachers on SRSD in writing. (in submitted)

  • McKeown, D., & FitzPatrick, E. Planning to write is planning to succeed: Word architects need blueprints too. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & M. Hebert (Eds.), Best Practices in Writing Instruction. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. (in press)

  • McKeown, D., FitzPatrick, E., & Sandmel, K. (2014). SRSD in practice: Creating a professional development experience for teachers to meet the writing needs of students with EBD. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, R. A. (2007). Forecasting the effects of scaling up social programs: An economics perspective. In B. Schneider & S.-K. McDonald (Eds.), Scale-up in education: Ideas in principle (Vol. I, pp. 173–186). New York: Rowland and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musu-Gillette, L., Robinson, J., McFarland, J., KewalRamani, A., Zhang, A., and Wilkinson-Flicker, S. (2016). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups 2016 (NCES 2016-007). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The nation’s report card: Writing 2011 (NCES 2012–470). Washington, D.C: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center on Intensive Intervention (2016). Academic interventions tool chart. http://www.intensiveintervention.org/chart/instructional-intervention-tools.

  • Noell, G. H., Gresham, F. M., & Gansle, K. A. (2002). Does treatment integrity matter? A preliminary investigation of instructional implementation and mathematics performance. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014385321849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W. (2007). Designing field trials of educational innovations. In B. Schneider & S. McDonald (Eds.), Scale-up in education: Issues in practice (Vol. II, pp. 23–40). New York: Rowland and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., Martinez, A., & Spybrook, J. (2007). Strategies for improving precision in group-randomized experiments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 5–29. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373707299460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salahu-Din, D., Persky, H., & Miller, J. (2008). The nation’s report card: Writing 2007 (NCES 2008–468). Washington, D.C: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanetti, L. M., Fallon, L. M., & Collier-Meek, M. A. (2013). Increasing teacher treatment integrity through performance feedback provided by school personnel. Psychology in the Schools, 50(2), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was made available through the Network for Enhancing Teacher Quality (NET-Q, Award Number US 336S090137) Grant by the U.S. Department of Education. The contents of this article do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M University, College Station, USA

    Debra McKeown & Julie Owens

  2. University of North Carolina, Charlotte, USA

    Erin FitzPatrick

  3. Starbucks Corporation, Seattle, USA

    Megan Brown

  4. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, USA

    Mary Brindle

  5. Georgia State University, Atlanta, USA

    Robert Hendrick

Authors
  1. Debra McKeown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erin FitzPatrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Megan Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mary Brindle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Julie Owens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Robert Hendrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Debra McKeown.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McKeown, D., FitzPatrick, E., Brown, M. et al. Urban teachers’ implementation of SRSD for persuasive writing following practice-based professional development: positive effects mediated by compromised fidelity. Read Writ 32, 1483–1506 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9864-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9864-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation