Teaching Reading and Writing

Brett Miller, Peggy McCardle, Richard Long

• Publisher: Brookes Publishing
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781598573640
• eBook ISBN: 9781598574463
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Research in Education

What's the connection between reading and writing, and how should they be taught—both together and separately? Discover the answers in this cutting-edge research volume, ideal for use as a graduate-level text or a trusted professional reference. Featuring groundbreaking contributions from a who's who of top-level researchers, this important volume gives educators the foundational knowledge they'll need to plan and deliver high-quality, evidence-based reading and writing instruction aligned with Common Core State Standards. Educators will fully explore the link between reading and writing, learn how they complement and enhance each other, and discover promising instructional approaches that can strengthen all students' literacy skills and reduce achievement gaps.

THE LATEST RESEARCH ON:

• Integrating reading and writing instruction
• Aligning instruction with Common Core State Standards
• Effectively translating the results of research studies into everyday practice
• Incorporating literacy instruction into academic content areas
• Developing a unified assessment model for literacy
• Building students' critical thinking skills
• Designing instruction and interventions for English language learners
• Creating preservice and inservice programs that help teachers support the reading-writing connection
• Using technology to teach—and strengthen—the reading-writing connection

1

Introduction

Brett Miller, Peggy McCardle, and Richard Long

Both reading and writing development begin in early childhood and are linked in daily function and in classroom activities from prekindergarten and kindergarten through high school and beyond. They form an integral part of the now widely adopted Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010). Reading has been recognized as an essential ability for all school children, and reading instruction has been a longstanding key focus of instruction in the early grades. The focus on writing instruction is more recent, but increasingly, literacy means both reading and writing. In addition, changes in early childhood education have resulted in a greater emphasis on early literacy development that includes oral language development, reading, and writing. An expanded emphasis on graduation rates also resulted in a greater emphasis on both reading and writing in middle and high school. But the reciprocal influences and the critical interface between reading and writing have been less well recognized. Although few would argue with the claim that reading and writing are related in important ways, there is little research addressing that relationship or when and how best to integrate these two critical areas instructionally.

In 2012, a panel of individuals with expertise in reading, writing, instruction, intervention, assessment, and research methods was convened under a partnership activity of the International Reading Association (IRA) and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) to discuss these topics. To be able to focus on the connection between reading and writing, rather than on how each person defined the two, it was agreed that they would define these two terms simply, a priori: Reading was defined as the ability to decode written text quickly and accurately and to comprehend what is read; writing was defined as the ability to produce connected text (sentences, paragraphs, and documents)—either by handwriting or by keyboarding—that communicates an idea or information. The results of that discussion are published in a summary document, The Reading–Writing Connection (IRA/NICHD, 2012). The widespread interest in delving more deeply into this topic led the group to propose an edited volume to lay out in much greater detail what we know in order to assist educators in addressing these areas within the CCSS and other initiatives as well as to explore the potential for productive additional research.

A substantial body of research on reading has existed for some time—its components, instruction, and intervention—and was documented more than a decade ago in two national reports focused primarily on K–3 but with some studies ranging into middle school–age students (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; NICHD, 2000). More recently, researchers have also been studying the effects of reading instruction and intervention for older students (preadolescent and adolescent as well as young adult). While intervening at these ages is more challenging, there have been some noteworthy successes (e.g., Calhoon, 2005; Edmonds et al., 2009; Vaughn et al., 2011).

For writing and writing instruction, there is less research, but there are some promising findings. Recent studies and syntheses examining both instruction and remediation have revealed aspects of intervention that have improved both the quality and quantity of student writing (e.g., Graham & Perin, 2007; Rogers & Graham, 2008; Sandmel & Graham, 2011) and the potential positive impact of writing instruction on reading comprehension (Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000; Graham & Hebert, 2010, 2011; Moats, 2005/2006; Neville & Searls, 1991; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991). Reading and writing exhibit interesting similarities; both require some depth of vocabulary knowledge (including word-internal morphology and meaning in context), grammatical knowledge (including complex sentence structure and usage), and genre knowledge. Successful writing and reading are both complex skill sets that require extensive self-regulation of flexible, goal-directed, problem-solving activities and the ability to effectively use strategies (e.g., Harris, Graham, Brindle, & Sandmel, 2009).

In this volume, authors—many of whom served on that initial panel—with expertise in reading, writing, instruction, intervention, assessment, and research methods provide insights into what is known about the interactions of reading and writing and what instructional approaches seem most promising. The volume presents these authors’ thinking on instructional issues, technology, and assessment approaches. The three chapters in Section 1, The Basis, address how we currently approach reading and writing instruction. Connor and colleagues (Chapter 2) and Costa and colleagues (Chapter 3) offer parallel chapters addressing the reading–writing connection from the reading and writing sides, respectively, whereas the team of Harris and Graham (Chapter 4) tackle both reading and writing and the history behind the relative disparity of attention that has been given to writing.

What is the nature of the connection between the two interrelated disciplines of reading and writing? This is the basic question that the panel convened by the IRA and NICHD explored. The panel developed a series of recommendations as to the nature of the reading and writing connection that reflected a wide range of disciplines. Among the key findings are the following five:

1. Reading has received more research attention than writing.

2. There is a significant need for more research on how and when to teach reading and writing together.

3. Most elementary-school writing instruction is focused on story writing. More attention needs to be given to persuasive and expository writing.

4. There is a need for an enhanced focus on the development of assessments examining common and unique skills that contribute to reading and writing in order to inform instruction.

5. While technology is a significant part of instruction, research is needed on the reading and writing connection that is specific to the use of technology.

Overall, the panel found that there is a need to understand reading and writing both as separate and as integrated endeavors.

To access the panel’s document, go to http://www.reading.org/Libraries/resources/reading-writingconnection_final.pdf

In Section 2, Applying What We Know, authors discuss applying what is already known and how this might be used as schools move forward to implement the CCSS. McCardle and Miller (Chapter 5) first tackle the issue of what we know and how we know it—what actually constitutes an evidence base and when that evidence can and should be used in practice. The chapter reviews past major sources of evidence as well as efforts that have been made to move that evidence to practice and discusses what should guide instruction in the classroom when sufficient, solid evidence does not exist. The next chapters in this section cover professional development and how reading and writing instructional practices are taught, with thoughts on directions for better preparing teachers to integrate reading and writing in their classrooms to better address the CCSS (Brenner, Chapter 6); the role of linguistic differences, including nonmainstream dialect and English as a second language, and how these factors have an impact on reading and writing (Washington and colleagues, Chapter 7); and the use of reasoning and analytic ability for interpreting texts and for presenting information and ideas orally and in writing, skills emphasized in the CCSS (Carlisle and colleagues, Chapter 8). Urbani and colleagues (Chapter 9) discuss what is known about project-based learning, reading, and writing across the disciplines and how these may relate to implementation of the CCSS. Finally, Strickland (Chapter 10) discusses efforts to integrate literacy activities into the CCSS and cautions about the application and potential misapplication of evidence in classrooms.

This book is not only about reading and writing but also about the intersection or connection between reading and writing. With this in mind, Section 3, Preparing for Change, as its title clearly indicates, addresses the intersection of theory, measurement, and technology with instruction as they relate to the intersection of reading and writing. Gorin and colleagues (Chapter 11) address measurement, including both formative and summative assessment as well as the possibility of integrating both reading and writing assessment into research and instruction. Technology has become omnipresent in life both inside and outside the classroom. Atwill and Blanchard (Chapter 12) tell us how technology can be used to enhance reading and writing and project where they think the field of educational technology is heading, and ramifications that current and future technologies have for classroom practice. In the last chapter in this section, Ahmed, Kim, and Wagner (Chapter 13) explain how models of reading and writing can elucidate the connections between reading and writing and why this should be important to teachers.

In the final chapter, we offer some thoughts that emerged during discussions with our panel and in broader discussions with the field through town hall meetings and presentations at association meetings about issues to consider in moving the field toward more fully understanding the nature and importance of the reading–writing connection, as well as summarizing areas for future research.

References

Calhoon, M.B. (2005). Effects of a peer-mediated phonological skill and reading comprehension program on reading skill acquisition of middle school students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(5), 424–433.

Edmonds, M.S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, E.K., Cable, A., Tackett, K.K., & Schnakenberg, J.W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543025998

Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39–50.

Graham, S., & Hebert, H. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading [A report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York]. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011). Writing to read: A meta-analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 710–744.

Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools [A report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York]. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

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

International Reading Association (IRA) & the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2012). The reading-writing connection. Retrieved from http://www.reading.org/Libraries/resources/reading-writingconnection_final.pdf

Moats, L. (2005/2006). How spelling supports reading: And why it is more regular and predictable than you may think. American Educator, Winter, 12–22, 42–43.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards: English language arts standards. Washington, DC: Authors.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. (NIH Publication No. 00-4754.) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Neville, D., & Searls, E. (1991). A meta-analytic review of the effects of sentence-combining on reading comprehension. Reading Research and Instruction, 31, 63–76.

Rogers, L., & Graham, S. (2008). A meta-analysis of single subject design writing intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 879–906.

Sandmel, K., & Graham, S. (2011). The process writing approach: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 396–407.

Snow, C., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Tierney, R., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & D. Pearson (Eds.), The handbook of reading research (Vol. 2; pp. 246–280). New York, NY: Longman.

Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Leroux, A.J., Roberts, G., Denton, ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• About the Editors
• About the Contributors
• Foreword by Jeb Bush
• Preface by Carrice Cummins
• Acknowledgments
• 1: Introduction
• I: The Basis: How Do We Approach Reading and Writing Today? Separately or as Two Sides of a Coin?
• II: Applying What We Know: Evidence Bases and Practical Implementations
• III: Preparing for Change: The Intersection of Theory, Measurement, and Technology with Instruction
• Index