Teaching Summary Writing to Students with Learning Disabilities via Strategy Instruction

References

• Asaro-Saddler, K. (2016). Writing instruction and self-regulation for students with Autism Spectrum Disorders: A systematic review of the literature. Topics in Language Disorders, 36, 266–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asaro-Saddler, K., Muir-Knox, H., & Meredith, H. (2018). The effects of a summary writing strategy on the literacy skills of adolescents with disabilities. Exceptionality, 28(2), 106–118.
   Google Scholar
• Bakken, J., Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (1997). Reading comprehension of expository science material and students with learning disabilities: A comparison of strategies. Journal of Special Education, 31, 300–324. doi:10.1177/002246699703100302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benzer, A., Sefer, A., Oren, Z., & Konuk, S. (2016). A student-focused study: Strategy of text summary writing and assessment rubric. Education and Science, 41(186), 163–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berninger, V., & Amtmann, D. (2003). Preventing written expression disabilities through early and continuing assessment and intervention for handwriting and/or spelling problems: Research into practice. In H. Swanson, K. Harris, and S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher, 10, 14–24. doi:10.3102/0013189X010002014
   Google Scholar
• Büyüknarci, O., Hennes, A., Rietz, C., & Grünke, M. (2015). Teaching children with learning disabilities to write concise summaries of stories. Insights into Learning Disabilities, 12, 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Center, B. A., Skiba, R. J., & Casey, A. (1985-1986). A methodology for the quantitative synthesis of intra-subject design research. Journal of Special Education, 19, 387–400. doi:10.1177/002246698501900404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciullo, S., Falcomata, T. & Vaughn, S. (2015). Teaching social studies to upper elementary students with learning disabilities: Graphic organizers and explicit instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38, 15–26. doi:10.1177/0731948713516767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dollins, C. (2012). Comprehending expository texts: Scaffolding students through writing summaries. The California Reader, 45, 22–28.
   Google Scholar
• Englert, C. & Marriage, T. (1991). Making students partners in the comprehension process: Organizing the reading “posse”. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 14, 123–138. doi:10.2307/1510519
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ennis, R. (2016). Using self-regulated strategy development to help high school students with EBD summarize informational text in social studies. Education and Treatment of Children, 39, 545–568. doi:10.1353/etc.2016.0024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, N., Fisher, D., & Hernandez, T. (2003). “What’s the Gist?” Summary writing for struggling adolescent writers. Voices from the Middle, 11, 43–49.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, A., & Graham, S. (2014). A meta-analysis of writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 80, 454–473. doi:10.1177/0014402914527238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2005). Writing better. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning disabilities (pp. 383–402). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2018). Evidence-based writing practices: A meta-analysis of existing meta-analyses. In R. Fidalgo, K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma, (Eds.). Design principles for teaching effective writing: Theoretically and empirically grounded principles (pp. 13–37). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools – A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., Collins, A. A., & Rigby-Wills, H. (2017). Writing characteristics of students with learning disabilities and typically achieving peers: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children, 83(2), 199–218. doi:10.1177/0014402916664070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Brookline Books.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2018). Self-regulated strategy development: Theoretical bases, critical instructional elements, and future research. In R. Fidalgo, K.R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Eds.). Design principles for teaching effective writing: Theoretical and empirical principles (pp. 119–151). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self-regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 295–340 doi:10.3102/00028312043002295
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1986) Writing research and the writer. American Psychologist, 41(10), 106–1113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebert, M., Gillespie, A. & Graham, S. (2013) Comparing effects of different writing activities on reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Reading and Writing, 26, 111–138. doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9386-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidi, S., & Anderson, V. (1986). Producing written summaries: Task demands, cognitive operations, and implications for instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56, 473–493. doi:10.3102/00346543056004473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jitendra, A., Hoppes, M. & Xin, Y. (2000). Enhancing main idea comprehension for students with learning problems: The role of summarization strategy and self-monitoring instruction. The Journal of Special Education, 34, 127–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jitendra, A., Cole, C., Hoppes, M., & Wilson, B. (1998). Effects of a direct instruction main idea summarization program and self-monitoring on reading comprehension of middle school students with learning disabilities. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 14(4), 379–396. doi:10.1080/1057356980140403
   Google Scholar
• Jiuliang, L. (2014). Examining genre effects on test takers’ summary writing performance. Assessing Writing, 22, 75–90. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2014.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W. R. (2010). Single-case designs technical documentation. Retrieved from What Works Clearinghouse website: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_scd.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, H. H. (2006). An alternative method for quantitative synthesis of single-subject researches: Percentage of data points exceeding the median. Behavior Modification, 30(5), 598–617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzec-Stawiarska, M. (2016). The influence of summary writing on the development of reading skills in a foreign language. System, 59, 90–99. doi:10.1016/j.system.2016.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, L., Reid, R., & Hagaman, J. (2012). Building comprehension in adolescents: Powerful strategies for improving reading and writing in content areas. Baltimore, MD: Brooks.
   Google Scholar
• Moeyaert, M, Ugille, M., Ferron, J., Beretvas, S., & Van den Noortgate, W. (2014). The influence of the design matrix on treatment effect estimates in the quantitative analyses of single-case experimental design research. Behavior Modification, 38, 665–704. doi:10.1177/0145445514535243
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeyaert, M., Ferron, J., Beretvas, S., & Van den Noortgate, W. (2014). From a single-level analysis to a multilevel analysis of single-case experimental designs. Journal of School Psychology, 52, 191–211. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Nation’s Report Card: Writing 2011 (NCES 2012–470). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education
   Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., Hagan-Burke, S., & Vannest, K. (2007). Percentage of all non-overlapping data (PAND) an alternative to PND. The Journal of Special Education, 40(4), 194–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Sauber, S. B. (2011). Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42(2), 284–299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, R., Hagaman, J. L., & Graham, S. (2014). Using self-regulated strategy development for written expression with students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 12, 21–42.
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds, G., Perin, D. (2009). A comparison of text structure and self-regulated writing strategies for composing from sources by middle school students. Reading Psychology, 30, 265–300. doi:10.1080/02702710802411547
   Google Scholar
• Saddler, B., Asaro-Saddler, K., Moeyaert, M., & Ellis-Robinson, T. (2017). The effects of a summarizing strategy on the written summaries of children with emotional and behavioral disorders. Remedial and Special Education, 38(2), 87–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saddler, B., Moran, S., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2004). Preventing writing difficulties: The effects of planning strategy instruction on the writing performance of struggling writers. Exceptionality, 12, 3–17.
   Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sreckovic, M. A., Common, E. A., Knowles, M. M., & Lane, K. L. (2014). A review of self-regulated strategy development for writing for students with EBD. Behavioral Disorders, 39, 56–77. doi:10.1177/019874291303900203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vannest, K.J., Parker, R.I., Gonen, O., & Adiguzel, T. (2016). Single Case Research: web based calculators for SCR analysis. (Version 2.0) [Web-based application]. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University. Retrieved Thursday 27th September 2018. Available from singlecaseresearch.org
   Google Scholar
• Wong, B., Wong, R., Perry, N., & Sawatsky, D. (1986). The efficacy of a self-questioning summarization strategy for use by underachievers and learning disabled adolescents in social studies. Learning Disabilities Focus, 2, 20–35.
   Google Scholar