Advertisement

Reading and Writing

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 1273–1294 | Cite as

The impact of supplemental handwriting and spelling instruction with first grade students who do not acquire transcription skills as rapidly as peers: a randomized control trial

  • Steve Graham
  • Karen R. Harris
  • Mary Adkins
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The impact of supplemental handwriting and spelling instruction on learning to write was examined in an experimental study with first grade students who were not acquiring these skills as rapidly as their classmates. Thirty students (16 boys, 14 girls) were randomly assigned to a handwriting and spelling instructional condition or a phonological awareness instructional control condition. Students in each condition received 16 h of one-on-one instruction. The treatment condition was designed to improve children’s handwriting fluency, handwriting legibility, spelling accuracy, and knowledge of spelling patterns. In comparison to students in the phonological awareness control condition, students who received supplemental handwriting and spelling instruction made greater gains in handwriting fluency, handwriting legibility, and spelling accuracy. The treatment condition also resulted in greater gains in sentence construction fluency and composition vocabulary, but did not statistically enhance composition length or composition quality. These findings provide partial support for the theoretical proposition that text transcription skills are causally related to writing. Further, this study demonstrates that explicit and supplemental handwriting and spelling instruction can play an important role in teaching writing to young children who acquire text transcription skills more slowly than their peers.

Keywords

Handwriting Spelling Writing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abbott, R., & Berninger, V. (1993). Structural equation modeling of relationships among developmental skills and writing skills in primary and intermediate-grade writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 478–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alves, R., Limpo, T., Fidalgo, R., Carvalhais, L., Pererira, L., & Carlio, S. (2016). The impact of promoting transcription on early text production: Effects on bursts and pauses, levels of written language, and writing performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 665–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berninger, V. (1999). Coordinating transcription and text generation in working memory during composing: Automatic and constructive processes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berninger, V., Mizokawa, D., & Bragg, R. (1991). Scientific practitioner: Theory-based diagnosis and remediation of writing disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berninger, V. W., Vaughan, K. B., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., Rogan, L. W., Brooks, A., et al. (1997). Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers: Transfer from handwriting to composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 652–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berninger, V. W., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R. D., Brooks, A., Abbott, S., Rogan, L., et al. (1998). Early intervention for spelling problems: Teaching functional spelling units of varying sizes with a multiple-connection framework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 587–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berninger, V., Vaughan, K., Abbott, R., Begay, K., Byrd, K., Curtain, G., Minnich, J., & Graham, S. (2002). Teaching spelling and composition alone and together: Implications for the simple view of writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Case-Smith, J., Holland, T., & White, S. (2014). Effectiveness of a co-taught handwriting-writing program for first grade students. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 34, 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Department for Education. (2012). The research evidence on writing. London, England: Department for Education. Retrieved From https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_.
  10. Graham, S. (1999). Handwriting and spelling instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 78–98.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1511268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Graham, S. (2006). Writing. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 457–478). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Graham, S. (in press). A writer(s) within community model of writing. In C. Bazerman, V. Berninger, D. Brandt, S. Graham, J. Langer, S. Murphy, P. Matsuda, D. Rowe, & M. Schleppegrell (Eds.), The lifespan development of writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of English.Google Scholar
  13. Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Fink, B. (2000). Is handwriting causally related to learning to write? Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 620–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Fink-Chorzempa, B. (2002). Contributions of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 669–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Loynachan, C. (1993). The basic spelling vocabulary. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Loynachan, C. (1996). The directed spelling thinking activity: Application with high frequency words. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11, 34–40.Google Scholar
  19. Graham, S., Hebert, M., Sandbank, M., & Harris, K. R. (2016). Credibly assessing the writing achievement of young struggling writers: Application of generalizability theory. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39, 72–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Graham, S., Liu, K., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., et al. (2017). Reading for writing: A meta-analysis of the impact of reading and reading instruction on writing. Review of Educational Research.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317746927.Google Scholar
  21. Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 1703–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Graham, S., & Weintraub, N. (1996). A review of handwriting research: Progress and prospect from l980 to l994. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 7–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hammill, D., & Larsen, S. (1996). Test of written language—3. Austin, TX: Pro-ED.Google Scholar
  24. Kellogg, R. (1993). The psychology of writing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Larsen, S., & Hammill, D. (1989). Test of legible handwriting. Austin, TX: Pro-ED.Google Scholar
  26. Larsen, S., & Hammill, D. (1999). Test of written spelling—4. Austin, TX: Pro-ED.Google Scholar
  27. McCutchen, D. (1988). “Functional automaticity” in children’s writing: A problem of metacognitive control. Written Communication, 5, 306–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Micahelowa, K. (2001). Primary education quality in Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa: Determinants of learning achievement and efficiency considerations. World Development, 29, 1699–1716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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
  30. O’Connor, R., Notari-Syverson, A., & Vadasy, P. (1998). Ladders to literacy: A kindergarten activity book. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  31. Research Center for Psychological and Educational Testing (RCPET). (2016). 105年國中教育會考各科計分與閱卷結果說明 [2016 comprehensive assessment program for junior high school students: Explanation of grading results]. Retrieved from http://www.cap.ntnu.edu.tw/exam/105/Pressrelease1050603.pdf.
  32. Rieben, L., Ntamakiliro, L., Gonthier, B., & Fayol, M. (2005). Effects of various early writing practices on reading and spelling. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosner, J. (1979). Helping children overcome learning disabilities (2nd ed.). New York: Walker.Google Scholar
  34. Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2016). A comprehensive meta-analysis of handwriting instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 225–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1986). Written composition. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 778–803). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  36. Uhry, J. K., & Sheperd, M. J. (1993). Segmentation/spelling instruction as part of a first-grade reading program: Effects on several measures of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler individual achievement test—III. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  38. Weintraub, N., Yinon, M., Hirsch, I., & Parush, S. (2009). Effectiveness of sensorimotor and task-oriented handwriting intervention in elementary school-aged students with handwriting difficulties. OTJR: Occupation Participation, and Health, 29, 125–134.Google Scholar
  39. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Learning Sciences Institute Australia – Brisbane CampusBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Mary Lou Fulton Teachers CollegeArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  3. 3.Gouher CollegeBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options