At-Risk Students: Evidence-Based Writing Interventions

Unlocking the Power of Writing: How Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) Transforms Outcomes for At-Risk Students

Writing effectively is essential for academic success, workplace readiness, and social engagement, promoting equity for all learners. Despite its importance, writing often receives less instructional time compared to other core areas like reading or math, leaving many students—particularly those in the community with learning disabilities (LD)—struggling to develop the necessary skills. The 2009 study Teaching Writing to At-Risk Students: The Quality of Evidence for Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) by Scott Baker and colleagues provides a comprehensive evaluation of SRSD’s effectiveness in improving writing outcomes for students with and at risk for LD. This blog explores the findings, highlighting the strength of the research supporting SRSD and its potential impact in classrooms.

Writing Challenges for At-Risk Students

Writing is a complex task that requires organizing ideas, applying grammatical rules, and tailoring content to a specific audience. These demands can be particularly overwhelming for students with LD, who often struggle with planning, revising, and sustaining attention during writing tasks, requiring resilience to persist in their learning efforts. National assessments paint a concerning picture: most students with disabilities score at or below basic levels in writing, signaling a need for interventions that directly address these challenges.

The stakes extend beyond academics. Employers frequently report that writing proficiency is critical in the workplace, yet many new employees must gain even basic skills, leading to costly on-the-job remediation. Addressing writing deficits is both an educational and economic imperative.

SRSD: A Research-Validated Writing Intervention

Developed by Drs. Steve Graham and Karen Harris, SRSD is a structured, evidence-based approach that teaches students specific strategies for planning, drafting, and revising their writing. It also integrates self-regulation skills such as goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-reinforcement. SRSD unfolds across six stages specifically designed to support at-risk students:

1. Background Knowledge: Students learn foundational knowledge needed for strategy use.
2. Discussion: The strategy’s purpose and benefits are explained.
3. Modeling: Teachers demonstrate how to apply the strategy.
4. Memorization: Students memorize strategy steps and mnemonics.
5. Support: Teachers scaffold students’ practice as they build proficiency.
6. Independent Use: At-risk students apply the strategy with minimal teacher support.

This comprehensive approach builds writing skills and fosters independence and confidence, empowering at-risk students to tackle writing tasks effectively, even in contexts affected by poverty.

The Study: Evaluating SRSD’s Evidence Base

Baker et al. analyzed five group experimental studies and 16 single-subject studies on SRSD, assessing their adherence to rigorous quality indicators for research. The studies focused on students with LD or those at risk for LD and evaluated SRSD’s impact on writing outcomes such as essay quality, use of genre elements, and writing fluency.

Key Findings from Group Studies

• High-Quality Research: All five group studies met stringent criteria for methodological rigor, including well-documented participant demographics, clear descriptions of interventions, and appropriate data analysis.
• Strong Effect Sizes: The average weighted effect size across the studies was +1.22, indicating a substantial positive impact of SRSD on writing outcomes. This surpasses the threshold for considering an evidence-based intervention.

Insights from Single-Subject Studies

• Broad Validation: Nine of the 16 single-subject studies achieved high methodological ratings, meeting the experimental control and external validity criteria.
• Replicable Success: These studies consistently improved students’ writing across different researchers and settings, especially among at-risk students, further validating SRSD as an evidence-based practice.

Why SRSD Works

The success of SRSD lies in its integration of explicit instruction with self-regulation. Students learn how to write and develop the metacognitive tools to manage the writing process. For example, SRSD teaches at-risk students to set goals, monitor their progress, and reward themselves for completing tasks. These skills are especially beneficial for students with LD, who often face challenges with executive functioning and task persistence.

Another strength of SRSD is its focus on all stages of writing. Unlike traditional approaches emphasizing rote grammar drills or sentence-level corrections, SRSD addresses planning, organization, and revision—critical elements for producing coherent and engaging writing.

Implications for Classroom Practice

SRSD’s robust evidence base makes it an excellent choice for schools seeking to improve writing outcomes for struggling and at-risk students. Here’s how educators can implement SRSD effectively:

1. Professional Development: Teachers need training to deliver SRSD with fidelity. The studies analyzed in this research often included practice-based professional development and ongoing coaching to support teachers.
2. Integration Across Grades: While most SRSD studies have focused on upper elementary and middle school grades, the approach can be adapted for younger and high school students.
3. Tiered Support: SRSD can serve as a core writing program in a multi-tiered system of support within a school. For at-risk students needing additional help, the intensity of instruction can be increased without requiring a new intervention.
4. Alignment with Curriculum: SRSD’s strategies can be integrated into content areas like social studies or science, enabling students to apply their skills across subjects.

Expanding the Research

While SRSD has been extensively studied by its developers and collaborators, more research is needed to examine its implementation by independent teams and at scale. For example, how does SRSD perform when integrated into district-wide professional development programs? What are its long-term effects on students’ academic trajectories? These questions are critical for understanding SRSD’s potential as a large-scale solution for improving writing outcomes.

Conclusion

The study by Baker et al. underscores the robust research foundation supporting SRSD as an evidence-based practice for teaching writing to at-risk students. With its structured yet flexible framework, SRSD equips students with the skills and confidence to succeed as writers, thinkers, and learners. For educators, adopting SRSD represents an opportunity to transform writing instruction and close achievement gaps, ensuring that all students—regardless of their starting point—can unlock the power of writing.

References

Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Graham, S. (2003). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities: Research-based applications and examples. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(2), 109–123.

De La Paz, S., & Graham, S. (1997a). Effects of dictation and advanced planning instruction on the composing of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 203–222.

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Improving learning disabled students’ skills at composing essays: Self-instructional strategy training. Exceptional Children, 56(3), 201–214.

Hillocks, G., Jr. (1984). What works in teaching composition: A meta-analysis of experimental treatment studies. American Journal of Education, 93(1), 133–170.

Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation(2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476.

Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Mason, L. H. (2006). Self-regulated strategy development for 2nd-grade students who struggle with writing. American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 295–340.

MacArthur, C. A., Schwartz, S. S., & Graham, S. (1991). Effects of a reciprocal peer revision strategy in special education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6(4), 201–210.