Category: Uncategorized

Evidence-Based Foundational Writing Skills 

In my last post, I explored five practical writing strategies for elementary students, from graphic organizers to self-talk and peer feedback. These tools give students a clear starting point, help them structure their writing, and build confidence in their own abilities.

But many teachers ask the next natural question: “How do I pull all these strategies together into a system that really works?”

That’s what this post is all about. I’ll look at a proven, research-based framework that organizes these strategies into a powerful sequence of instruction. Decades of studies show that this approach helps elementary students, from kindergartners to fifth graders, and struggling writers to high achievers, grow into confident, independent writers.

Why Strategies Alone Aren’t Enough

Teaching a single strategy can spark short-term progress. For example, a graphic organizer helps students structure ideas for one assignment. But if we stop there, students may not transfer that learning to the next task.

Research in writing instruction is clear: strategies stick when taught within a broader framework that includes modeling, guided practice, and self-regulation. In other words, we need to teach how to use the strategies, why they matter, and how students can take ownership of them over time.

That’s where the Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) framework comes in.

What Is SRSD?

At its core, SRSD is both a teaching method and a learning process that significantly enhances writing skills. Literacy researchers Dr. Karen Harris and Dr. Steve Graham developed it, wanting to answer a big question: How can we teach writing in a way that works for every student, especially those who struggle?

Their solution was to combine explicit writing strategies with self-regulation skills like goal setting, self-talk, and reflection. The result is a classroom-tested approach that has been studied in hundreds of classrooms across the U.S. and around the world.

SRSD is not a replacement curriculum. Instead, teachers can weave a flexible framework into any writing program or subject area. Whether you use CKLA, Wonders, Benchmark, or your own units of study, SRSD provides the missing link: the step-by-step process for teaching students how to use strategies effectively and independently as part of their writing process.

The Six Stages of SRSD — Explained Simply

SRSD unfolds in six stages. Teachers don’t have to follow them rigidly, but the sequence matters because it gradually shifts responsibility from teacher to student.

1. Develop Background Knowledge

Students need the right foundation before they can use a strategy. In this stage, teachers build vocabulary, genre, and content knowledge. For example, before teaching opinion writing, spend time reading mentor texts, discussing what makes a strong opinion, and practicing with simple examples.

2. Discuss It

Here, students and teachers discuss the strategy: What does it mean? When would we use it? Why does it help? This stage enhances engagement by motivating students and making the purpose clear.

3. Model It

This is the heart of SRSD. Teachers think aloud and model the strategy’s entire process, including the self-regulation tools. For example: “I’m going to use TREE to plan my opinion. My topic is ‘Should we have homework?’ My first reason is… Oh, wait, that’s not strong enough, let me try again.” Students see the invisible thought process of a writer.

4. Memorize It

Students learn to internalize the strategy so they can use it without constant scaffolds. Mnemonics like TREE (Topic, Reasons, Explanation, Ending) and TIDE (Topic, Important details, Details explained, Ending) are easy for kids to remember and use.

5. Support It

In this stage, teachers provide guided practice. Students try the strategy with scaffolds, feedback, and encouragement. Over time, supports are gradually removed.

6. Independent Performance

Finally, students use the strategy on their own. By this point in the writing process, they can plan, draft, and revise independently, not just for one assignment, but across subjects and genres.

Why SRSD Works: The Research

What makes SRSD unique is its evidence base. In fact, SRSD is one of the most well-researched writing interventions in the world.

• A meta-analysis of SRSD studies found very large effect sizes on writing quality, organization, and length.
• The approach benefits all students, including those with learning disabilities, ADHD, or language barriers.
• Gains are not just immediate; they last over time and transfer to new writing tasks.

Researchers often describe SRSD results as “over the moon.” And classroom teachers confirm it: once students know the strategies and self-regulation tools, writing stops being a mystery.

What SRSD Looks Like in an Elementary Classroom

Let’s make this concrete. Imagine you’re teaching fourth graders to write informative essays about animal habitats.

1. Develop Background Knowledge: Students read short passages about polar bears, deserts, and rainforests. Together, you highlight essential vocabulary and concepts.
2. Discuss It: You explain the TIDE strategy (Topic, Important details, Details explained, Ending) and ask students when they might use it.
3. Model It: In front of the class, you write a short essay about polar bears. You say things like: “I want to start with a clear topic sentence: ‘Polar bears live in the Arctic.’ Now, what’s my first important detail?”
4. Memorize It: Students practice chanting “T-I-D-E” and create a colorful anchor chart to hang in the classroom.
5. Support It: Students plan essays with a partner, using mentor texts, a graphic organizer, and your guidance.
6. Independent Performance: Finally, each student writes an independent essay, using the strategy without scaffolds to enhance their writing skills.

By the end of the unit, your students will not only know more about animal habitats but also know how to tackle future informative writing tasks with confidence.

The Self-Regulation Side

One of the most powerful features of SRSD is its emphasis on self-regulation. Instead of just telling students what to do, SRSD equips them to:

• Set goals: “Today I’m going to add at least three reasons to my opinion essay.”
• Use self-talk: “I can do this. If I get stuck, I’ll look back at my organizer.”
• Monitor progress: “Did I use all the parts of TREE?”
• Reflect: “Next time I’ll add more details to my explanations.”

These habits extend beyond writing. Students start applying them in reading, math, and even personal challenges. That’s why teachers often say SRSD doesn’t just create better writers, it makes more confident learners.

How SRSD Connects to the Strategies from Blog 1

If you read our first blog, you’ll notice that SRSD doesn’t replace those strategies; it organizes and strengthens them.

• Graphic Organizers? Used heavily in the Support It stage.
• Sentence Starters? Integrated during Discuss It and Model It.
• Self-Talk? Explicitly taught in self-regulation routines.
• Modeling? Central to the Model It stage.
• Peer Feedback? Encouraged during Support It and Independent Performance to boost student engagement.

In other words, SRSD is the framework that makes those individual strategies stick and transfer across assignments.

Getting Started with SRSD

Although the idea of six stages may sound complex, SRSD is designed to be teacher-friendly and flexible. You don’t need to overhaul your curriculum or education plans to start using it.

Here are three practical steps:

1. Pick one strategy (like TREE for opinion writing) and teach it using the SRSD stages.
2. Model and think aloud more than you think you need to. Students learn as much from watching your process as from writing themselves.
3. Encourage self-talk and goal setting early and often. Even a simple reminder — “Writers, check if you have your topic sentence!” builds self-regulation habits.

Over time, you can expand to more genres, strategies, and independence.

What Teachers Say about SRSD

Teachers who use SRSD consistently share three themes:

• Clarity: They finally feel like they have a roadmap for teaching writing.
• Confidence: Struggling writers begin to see themselves as capable.
• Transfer: Students apply strategies across subjects — in science reports, social studies essays, and even personal narratives.

As one elementary teacher put it: “For the first time, my students weren’t asking me what to write. They knew how to get started and what to do next.”

Conclusion: A Framework That Lasts

Teaching writing skills can feel overwhelming, especially when every student is at a different level. But with the right framework, writing instruction becomes manageable, effective, and even joyful.

The Self-Regulated Strategy Development framework gives teachers a step-by-step process for teaching writing strategies in a way that sticks. It combines explicit instruction with self-regulation, creating better writing outcomes and more confident, independent learners.

If you’ve ever felt stuck wondering how to make writing strategies work long-term, SRSD is the answer.

---

Five Writing Strategies for Elementary Students

Writing is one of the most important skills we teach in elementary school. It helps students organize their thoughts, communicate clearly, and build confidence in their own voices. Yet for many teachers, the writing process and instruction feel like an uphill climb. Some students love to talk but freeze when asked to put their ideas on paper. Others can generate ideas but struggle to give their writing structure. For many children, writing simply feels overwhelming.

The good news is this: research shows that explicit writing strategies make a big difference. When students learn how to approach writing step by step, they improve their papers and start to see themselves as writers.

In this post, I’ll explore five practical writing strategies and practice techniques for elementary students that any teacher can introduce in their classroom. These strategies are evidence-informed, classroom-tested, and flexible enough for grades K–5.

Why Writing Strategies Matter in Elementary Grades

Elementary school is the foundation for lifelong literacy. Improving writing skills strengthens reading comprehension, supports content learning in science and social studies, and encourages critical thinking. Students who write regularly perform better on assessments and become more confident learners.

Yet many curricula underemphasize writing or treat it as something students will “pick up” naturally. Without explicit instruction, students are left to guess what good writers do. Teaching writing strategies changes the game.

• Strategies make writing visible. They show students what successful writers do when planning, drafting, and revising.
• Strategies build independence. Instead of waiting for a teacher to guide every step, students learn tools they can apply independently.
• Strategies boost motivation and engagement. Writing feels less intimidating when students have a plan that they know works.

With that in mind, consider five strategies you can bring into your classroom this year.

1. Use Graphic Organizers to Build Structure

One of the most powerful tools for elementary writers is the graphic organizer. Students often have ideas but struggle to structure them into a coherent piece. A simple organizer provides a visual roadmap that makes writing less abstract.

Two classroom-tested examples:

• TREE (Topic sentence, Reasons, Explanation, Ending) is perfect for opinion writing.
• TIDE (Topic sentence, Important details, Details explained, Ending) is ideal for informative writing.

These organizers break complex writing tasks into manageable parts. Younger students can use pictures or symbols in the boxes, while older students can jot down whole sentences.

Classroom tip: Model how to fill out the organizer with a shared writing example. For instance, if your class is debating “Should recess be longer?”, demonstrate how to write the topic sentence, brainstorm reasons, and support each one with explanations.

2. Provide Sentence Starters and Frames

For emerging writers, the hardest part is often just getting started. Sentence starters and writing frames give students a safe entry point into writing.

Examples of sentence starters:

• In my opinion…
• One reason is…
• For example…
• In conclusion…

Over time, students move beyond the frames, but in the beginning, using mentor texts as supports can unlock fluency and confidence through practice.

Classroom tip: Post sentence starters on an anchor chart or provide a laminated “transition card” at each desk. Encourage students to experiment by combining starters in new ways.

3. Teach Students to Use Self-Talk 

Strong writers often coach themselves as they work: “Does this sentence make sense?” or “I need to explain this idea more clearly.” We can teach elementary students the same habit to enhance their writing skills.

Simple self-talk prompts:

• What’s my goal for this piece?
• Did I include enough details?
• How can I make my ending stronger?

Students can say these questions out loud at first, then gradually internalize them. Self-talk builds self-regulation, the ability to monitor and adjust their own work.

Classroom tip: Model self-talk while writing in front of your students. Let them hear you pause and say, “Hmm, I don’t like that sentence yet. I’ll try it another way.”

---

4. Model and Think Aloud as a Writer

One of the most powerful teaching moves in writing instruction is to write in front of your students. This demystifies the process and shows them that even skilled writers make mistakes, change their minds, and revise.

How to model effectively:

• Use chart paper, a document camera, or an interactive whiteboard.
• Talk aloud about your thought process: “I want my topic sentence to be strong, so I’ll try starting with a question.”
• Emphasize that writing is a process, not a one-and-done task.

Students who see their teacher wrestling with word choice or structure learn that this struggle occurs every day and can be solved with strategies.

Classroom tip: Set aside 5–10 minutes for “live writing” at the start of each new unit. Keep it short and authentic.

5. Make Revision and Peer Feedback Simple and Routine

Many students think the first draft is the final draft, but understanding the writing process can help them see the value in revision. To change this mindset, we need to normalize revision and peer feedback in manageable ways for elementary classrooms.

Age-appropriate revision strategies:

• Use a “two stars and a wish” system: two things the student did well, and one suggestion for improvement.
• Focus revision on one specific goal (e.g., adding details, improving endings) instead of overwhelming students with everything at once.
• Provide checklists tailored to the genre: opinion, narrative, or informative.

Classroom tip: Pair students for a 5-minute feedback swap after drafting. Keep the process structured and positive to build confidence.

When should elementary students practice writing?

Integrating writing practice into students’ daily routines is essential for developing their skills effectively. Regular exposure and diverse writing opportunities enhance fluency and build confidence in young learners, making writing a natural and enjoyable part of their academic experience.

Moreover, it is beneficial to incorporate writing practice into various subjects throughout the day. When students are engaged in science projects, social studies discussions, or even math problem-solving, encouraging them to write about their observations, analyses, and conclusions can reinforce content comprehension and writing abilities. Such interdisciplinary writing activities help students see the practical applications of writing skills.

Encouraging students to keep journals or writing logs can further promote habitual practice. These personal writing exercises allow children to express thoughts and feelings creatively, without the pressure of formal assessment. By valuing structured and free-form writing, students grow comfortable experimenting with language, syntax, and expression, fostering a positive attitude toward writing.

Ultimately, emphasizing the importance of consistency in writing practice, alongside meaningful feedback from teachers and peers, fosters a classroom environment where students view writing as an assignment and a valuable tool for communication and learning. This holistic approach inspires students to engage with writing autonomously, cultivating lifelong literacy enthusiasts.

Practical Tips for Getting Started

These education strategies are most powerful when implemented gradually. Here are three guiding principles for teachers:

1. Start small. Choose one strategy — like graphic organizers — and stick with it for several weeks before layering in another.
2. Repeat and reinforce. Elementary students benefit from practice and routine. Use the same strategy across multiple assignments so it becomes automatic.
3. Adapt for grade level.
   • In K–2, keep strategies highly visual and interactive. Draw pictures, act out ideas, and use simple sentence frames.
   • Increase independence in grades 3–5 by encouraging students to fill out organizers and set their own goals.

A Realistic Example: Opinion Writing in Grade 3

Let’s imagine you’re teaching a third-grade opinion writing lesson. The class is tackling the question: Should pets be allowed in school? This is a high-interest topic that engages students and sparks debate. Here’s how you could combine the five strategies in one coherent lesson.

Step 1: Graphic Organizer (TREE)

• Begin by introducing the TREE organizer on the board: T = Topic sentence, R = Reasons, E = Explanations, E = Ending.
• With the class, brainstorm reasons why pets should or should not be allowed. Write their suggestions in the “R” section.
• Then, ask students to select their top three reasons and write them down in their organizers. Under each reason, guide them to jot down one explanation (e.g., “Pets make students happy → This helps kids focus more in class”).

Teacher language:

“Writers, remember that your reasons are stronger if you explain why they matter. If your reason is ‘Pets are fun,’ how does that help in school? Let’s add an explanation underneath.”

Step 2: Sentence Starters

• Hand out a list of sentence starters (on an anchor chart or small reference card).
• Model how to plug the organizer notes into a starter:
  • “One reason pets should be in school is that they make students happy.”
  • “Another reason is that pets can teach responsibility.”
• Please encourage students to mix and match the frames so their writing doesn’t sound too repetitive.

Teacher language:

“Sentence starters are like training wheels. They help us get moving. You don’t have to keep them forever, but they make it easier to write complete thoughts now.”

Step 3: Self-Talk

• Before students begin drafting, introduce a self-talk checklist on the board:
  1. Did I write a clear topic sentence?
  2. Do I have three reasons?
  3. Did I explain each reason?
  4. Did I write an ending sentence?
• Ask students to pause after each paragraph and whisper one of the prompts to themselves or check it off their organizer.

Teacher language:

“Good writers talk to themselves while they work. I want you to ask yourself: Did I explain my reason? If the answer is no, go back and add more.”

Step 4: Modeling

• Show your own quick draft on chart paper or a projector. Write one reason and an explanation in real time.
• As you write, stop and make mistakes on purpose: cross out a vague sentence, add a stronger detail, or swap a starter.

Teacher language:

“Hmm… I wrote, ‘Pets are fun.’ That doesn’t sound strong enough. Let me revise. I’ll change it to, ‘Pets make students happy, which helps them stay calm in class.’ See how that’s more convincing?”

This transparency shows students that revising is normal, not a sign of failure.

Step 5: Peer Feedback

• After drafting, pair students for a structured feedback swap. Give them a checklist or a simple routine:
  • Read your partner’s paper.
  • Share one compliment (something that worked well).
  • Share one suggestion (something they could improve).
• Model how to give feedback in a kind, specific way.

Teacher language:

“When you give feedback, avoid saying ‘It’s good’ or ‘It’s bad.’ Instead, say, ‘I like how you used a strong ending,’ or ‘I think you could explain your second reason more.’”

The Result

By the end of the lesson, students have:

• A structured plan (TREE).
• Scaffolds for getting started (sentence starters).
• Internal reminders to guide their work (self-talk).
• A clear model to follow (your live writing).
• A supportive classroom community (peer feedback).

Instead of staring at a blank page, students have the tools and confidence to produce a complete opinion piece.

Why These Strategies Work

Each of these approaches is backed by research in writing instruction:

• Graphic organizers improve organization and content quality.
• Sentence frames help students internalize academic language.
• Self-talk develops metacognition, a key predictor of writing success.
• Modeling shows the invisible thought processes behind good writing.
• Peer feedback builds a classroom community of writers who learn from one another.

Combined, these strategies improve a single piece of writing, enhance writing skills, boost engagement, and change how students think about themselves as writers.

Looking Ahead

Writing doesn’t have to be a mystery for elementary students or their teachers. With practical strategies, students gain confidence, improved writing skills, structure, and motivation to express their ideas.

In this post, we focused on five writing strategies for elementary students and how mentor texts can support these strategies in action, which you can use immediately. But here’s the next question teachers often ask: How do I combine all these strategies into a coherent approach that really sticks?

That’s what we’ll explore in the second blog of this series: a research-based framework that blends writing strategies with self-regulation so students grow into confident, independent writers.

---

This blog is the third installment in my three-part series on SRSD in Canada, where I explore how evidence-based writing instruction is transforming classrooms across provinces. If you missed the earlier posts, you can start with:

• The Science of Writing: Why Canadian Schools Need SRSD Now
• SRSD Implementation Strategies for K–12 in Canada

Together, these three blogs offer a roadmap for Canadian leaders: why writing instruction matters, how to implement SRSD across grade levels, and how to fund evidence-based writing PD using existing resources.

Discover Existing Funding Avenues Within School Budgets

School districts and education leaders across Canada know how critical strong writing skills are for students’ long-term success. The research on explicit, evidence-based writing instruction is clearer than ever, and programs like Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) are gaining traction in schools determined to close achievement gaps. But the pressing question remains: how do boards actually pay for it?

The encouraging news: most boards already have funding streams that overlap with writing instruction and literacy improvement. Leaders can unlock funds often hiding in plain sight by strategically connecting evidence-based practices in writing PD to existing priorities. Success comes from knowing where to look, how to frame the initiative, and how to sustain it across years and departments.

Common Funding Lines That Support Writing PD

Regardless of region or board size, literacy improvement is embedded in multiple budget lines. By aligning your planning with these existing allocations, boards can build a cost-effective strategy for scaling PD.

• Curriculum and Instruction PD Budgets
  Most boards already earmark funds for teacher planning, strategies, and instructional techniques. If your board’s three-year improvement plan prioritizes literacy, these funds can directly support writing-focused PD.
  
• Literacy Intervention and Recovery Funds
  Following COVID-19, provinces invested heavily in literacy recovery. Writing PD, particularly structured approaches like SRSD, can be positioned as part of learning acceleration efforts for students who are behind.
  Ontario Learning Recovery Plan

• ELL / MLL / EAL Supports
  Students identified as English Language Learners (ELL), English as an Additional Language (EAL), or Multilingual Learners (MLL) benefit greatly from explicit instruction using mentor texts, structured feedback, and vocabulary development. Boards often dedicate funding to closing these language gaps.
  Ontario ESL/ELD Policy

• Special Education Allocations
  SRSD is strongly supported in research with students with learning disabilities and diverse needs. Allocations for students requiring targeted interventions can be tapped to pilot or expand writing PD.
  What Works Clearinghouse: SRSD Research

• Indigenous Education Budgets
  Writing instruction highlighting voice, identity, and culturally relevant approaches aligns well with Indigenous education priorities. For example, British Columbia provides targeted Indigenous Education funding for boards.
  BC Indigenous Education Funding

• Rural and Small School Innovation Funds
  Multi-grade classrooms in rural Canada need flexible, efficient writing instruction. Ontario’s Rural and Northern Education Fund (RNEF) is one example of resources that can be used to support effective PD.
  Ontario Rural and Northern Education Fund

Provincial Levers and How to Frame SRSD

Each province has unique funding mechanisms and educational priorities. Understanding these helps leaders position evidence-based writing PD for success.

Ontario
After the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s Right to Read (2022), boards are expected to use evidence-based literacy practices. The 2023 Ontario Language Curriculum reinforces the importance of systematic, explicit instruction in reading and writing.
Ontario Right to Read Inquiry | Ontario Language Curriculum 2023

British Columbia
BC emphasizes Core Competencies (Communication, Thinking, Personal, and social) and proficiency-based learning. Framing writing PD as central to education, skills development, and social-emotional growth makes it a strong fit.
BC Core Competencies | BC Proficiency Scale

Alberta & Saskatchewan
Alberta is implementing a new English Language Arts and Literature (ELAL) curriculum focused on structured, explicit approaches. Saskatchewan’s 2023 Human Rights Commission report on reading disabilities highlights the urgency of interventions, making writing PD a natural extension.
Alberta ELAL Curriculum | Saskatchewan Right to Read Report

Atlantic Canada
Results from the Pan-Canadian Assessment Program (PCAP) underscore ongoing literacy challenges. Provinces like Nova Scotia now provide targeted recovery grants and pilot funds that can be aligned with evidence-based writing PD.
PCAP 2021 Report | Nova Scotia OST Grants

Cooperative and Shared Service Models

Boards can reduce costs and maximize impact by collaborating:

• Board Consortia  Neighboring boards pool funds for shared PD sessions or coaching. In Ontario, procurement groups like OECM make joint initiatives cost-effective.
• University Partnerships  Partnering with education faculties opens access to cost-shared PD and opportunities to publish local student data for grants.
• Philanthropy & Foundations   Canadian foundations and local education funds often support PD framed as equity and career-readiness initiatives.

Making the Case: A Clear Funding Narrative

When presenting to finance teams or trustees, leaders succeed by showing:

• Research-based and proven outcomes (e.g., SRSD effect sizes with students with LD)
  Meta-Analysis of SRSD
• Target groups (ELL, LD, Indigenous, rural learners)
• Planning and progress monitoring (baseline assessments → checkpoints → growth data)
• Sustainability (e.g., Year 2 costs decline as coaches and curriculum specialists take over training)

Conclusion

Investing in evidence-based writing PD is not about finding new money but reframing existing priorities. Across Canada, leaders are strategically tapping curriculum funds, literacy recovery budgets, Indigenous education allocations, and rural innovation grants to make writing instruction a reality. By aligning initiatives with provincial strategies, leveraging shared service models, and grounding proposals in research, schools can give teachers the strategies, feedback, and mentor texts they need to transform student writing. The path forward is clear: with thoughtful planning and smart funding alignment, boards can ensure every student builds the writing skills, vocabulary, and confidence they need for success.

---

Understanding the SRSD Framework and Its Role in Canadian Schools

This is the second installment in my three-part series on SRSD in Canada.

Canadian school boards face a demanding challenge: finding an evidence-based writing intervention that is flexible enough for kindergarten through high school, that works for both small rural classes and bustling urban schools, that respects bilingual realities, and that coaches teachers to deliver lasting change. Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) has established itself as a gold standard for explicit writing instruction across North America. The best part? With a strong implementation plan, Canadian leaders can see sustainable gains across every context and student profile, including those with learning disabilities.

Start with Clarity: SRSD as Framework

SRSD isn’t a replacement curriculum. It’s a structured methodology designed to weave directly into a board’s existing writing content, whether Ontario’s new Language curriculum, Alberta’s updated ELA standards, or cross-curricular writing in BC and Saskatchewan.

What shifts for teachers with SRSD? The heart is moving to explicit instruction: Teachers model not just how to write but also the self-regulation strategies that underpin strong writing. Students don’t just write to prompts; they learn to plan, set goals, use self-talk, and apply flexible strategies to every genre. The classroom looks different: many think-alouds, plenty of student “goal setting,” classroom anchor charts, and routine debriefs linking writing strategies to real outcomes.

One key to embedding SRSD for the long term is investing in instructional coaching. Change sticks when teachers get regular, just-in-time support—not just front-loaded PD. Canadian systems that have built effective science of reading (SoR) models now know that sustainable improvement lives in job-embedded coaching and mentor-mentee relationships.

Year 0 (Planning): Build the Backbone

The groundwork matters before launching any new instructional initiative. Districts that invest in a deliberate pre-launch phase see higher uptake, fewer “pockets of resistance,” and stronger data stories later on.

Key steps:

• Form a diverse implementation team. This should include board-level administrators, curriculum leaders, instructional coaches, and teachers from different grade bands and program types.
• Pilot or universal launch? Start with a limited group for pressure-testing and proof points, or roll out broadly for system-wide energy? Both approaches work, but pilots often provide useful data and teacher champions.
• Design the PD and data plan: Map out training, regular coaching conversations, and a clear strategy for capturing baseline, interim, and endline data on teacher practice and student writing.
• Align funding and resources: Identify whether SRSD will be resourced through board PD lines, provincial grants, or (in some provinces) specific literacy improvement dollars.

The foundation built in Year 0 will determine how smoothly the intervention progresses, especially in large or decentralized boards, as it sets the stage for the development of effective teaching strategies. A clear backbone plan means everyone knows not just the “what,” but also the “why” and “how”—before the classrooms get busy.

Year 1 (Learn + Launch): Teacher Course + Unlimited Mentoring

Effective SRSD adoption starts by equipping teachers. A flexible, self-paced course—broken out by grade bands (K–1, 2–5, and 6–12)—gives every educator the necessary core SRSD routines, classroom moves, and genre-specific examples.

Coaches play a different role. A “Master Class” series delivered live and focused on real classroom practice gives instructional coaches, lead teachers, and mentors hands-on experience in observing, supporting, and troubleshooting SRSD routines.

What distinguishes a high-fidelity SRSD system?

• Classroom look-fors: Consistent student self-talk, teacher modeling, goal setting, and strategy anchor charts appear in every class.
• Fidelity tools: Coaches use checklists, rubrics, and video recordings to ensure lessons match the SRSD model.
• Student work sampling: Writing samples are collected at the start, midpoint, and end to measure growth beyond test scores or anecdotal feedback.
• Curricular pacing: Most boards align SRSD windows with their writing units but allow built-in “pause, catch-up, and spiral” time teachers don’t feel rushed, and student needs drive the pace.

Table: Year 1 SRSD Implementation Roadmap

Month	Teacher Activity	Coach Activity	Admin/Leadership
September	Complete SRSD course	Attend Master Class	Set data collection dates
October–December	Classroom modeling	Observe, give feedback	Monitor fidelity checks
January–March	Peer lesson demos	PLCs, mentor group	Review dashboard
April–June	Adjust/pivot routines	Deep-dive into data	Plan for Year 2 scaling

Year 2 (Deep Integration & Scale): Make it Permanent

By Year 2, the groundwork pays off. Implementation shifts from “project” to “how we write here.” Curriculum teams embed Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) tools into English Language Arts (ELA), science, social studies, and RTI/intervention blocks where writing is assessed. Multi-disciplinary use accelerates student metacognition, enhances student engagement, and helps teachers see the value of education across grades and subjects.

Instructional coaches lead grade-band or vertical PLCs, supporting regular data dives and lesson study. Teachers begin to take on more peer-modeling: sharing annotated writing samples, inviting colleagues into STRATEGY lessons, and integrating social-emotional learning into the practice to build a knowledge network across schools.

Admin and board leaders have real-time data: teacher uptake rates, fidelity of lesson delivery, and student outcomes—often visualized through simple dashboards.

Districts using consortia or multi-board collaborations can now expand sharing discoveries, artifacts, and lessons learned, building a regional playbook for SRSD sustainability. Fidelity isn’t left to chance; it’s measured, celebrated, and supported at each stage.

Special Cases: Flexing SRSD for Canadian Realities

Canadian classrooms demand flexibility.

Early Writers (K–1): Rather than waiting for fluent transcribers, SRSD works from where writers start: labeling drawings, moving to sentence creation, then genre awareness. Teachers model the simplest strategies (“What was my idea again? Let’s say it three times before I write”).

ELL/MLL Students: SRSD’s self-talk routines can be introduced in students’ strongest language. Teachers encourage students to plan, rehearse, and prompt themselves using their home language as a bridge to English or French tasks.

Split Grades and Rural Settings: Multi-grade teachers use common mini-lessons for planning and revision, but tailor tasks for primary vs. junior learners. Rural/remote schools share anchor charts and work samples across grades, using virtual PLCs to build consistency even when teacher turnover is high.

Indigenous Schools and Communities: SRSD adapts for local priorities. Schools engage community input on culturally relevant prompts, respect sovereignty in program design, and ensure writing strategies arise from, not simply are applied to, community contexts. Elders or local knowledge keepers might participate in story planning or sharing circles.

Markers of Progress: What to Notice by Thanksgiving, by June, and in Year 2

Boards need clear indicators of self-regulated momentum, not just hope. Here are sample milestones to map:

By Thanksgiving

• Coaches observe teachers using explicit modeling and talk-alouds
• Students articulate simple writing strategies (“Plan, say, write, check”)
• Early writing samples show more detail and planning, even among K–3

By June

• 70%+ of participating teachers implement full SRSD routines
• Student work: longer, better-organized, more self-monitoring, and more self-correcting writing
• Data dashboard tracks both qualitative voice (teacher/student reflection) and quantitative outputs

By Year 2

• SRSD lessons appear in ELA, science, and social studies
• Coaches report stronger teacher confidence and efficacy
• Admin teams close the gap between pilot and universal implementation

Sample Dashboards:

Metric	Data Source	Sample Target
Teacher SRSD Routine      Uptake	Fidelity Rubric	80% by June
Student Self-Regulation Skills	Writing Conference	Up 50% by June
Writing Quality (all learners)	Pre/post writing task	Up 1.5 levels
Teacher Confidence	Survey/interview	90% positive

Voice matters too. Teachers talked about how planning tools calmed their reluctant writers, boosting their motivation to engage in writing exercises. Students describe the steps they use to approach a big task. These mini-stories provide “on the ground” feedback, bringing dashboard data to life.

Ready to Build a Board-Level Plan?

Canadian schools can benefit from a successful SRSD implementation, offering a framework to integrate writing strategies in existing curricula. Leaders looking to bring SRSD into their district, region, or network can have a full “SRSD Canada Implementation Blueprint Pack.” This includes role maps, timelines, PD session outlines, fidelity checklists, data dashboards, and sample teacher-facing resources.

Those who want a personal walkthrough can book a free board strategy session with an experienced SRSD researcher. Gain local insight into how provinces with new language curricula, centralized PD models, or high-need rural/remote schools make SRSD work at scale.

Bonus Resources:

• Customizable Gantt chart implementation template
• Coach look-for and self-assessment templates
• Leadership slides perfect for board presentations or PD days

SRSD doesn’t just fill a gap; it offers a research-backed route to better writing outcomes for Canadian schools no matter the geography, language, or grade level. Administrators and coaches working together can expect sustainable growth, equity across cohorts, and a lasting writing culture.

---

Bridging the Literacy Gap: From Reading to Writing

Canada’s commitment to high-quality reading instruction has grown sharper over the past decade. New provincial standards for structured literacy and sweeping investments in educator training have started to tilt early reading outcomes in a positive direction. But while students can now sound out words and read with greater fluency, the fundamental task of effective communication through creativity and conveying ideas with clarity on the page remains a silent gap.

Literacy leaders, coaches, and consultants across Canada are beginning to recognize that reading-only reform falls short if classroom writing proficiency is left to chance. The strongest research on writing, much of it led by Karen Harris and Steve Graham, delivers a simple, powerful message: effective writing isn’t a moonshot or a gift, but something that can be taught, step by step, using methods as thoroughly studied as those behind the Science of Reading.

SRSD (Self-Regulated Strategy Development) now enters as the structured writing counterpart to structured literacy: explicit, evidence-driven, developmental, and completely adaptable to Canadian classrooms from coast to coast, emphasizing effective writing as a core component.

The Canadian Literacy Landscape Is Shifting: Reading Gains Without Writing Won’t Hold

Provincial curricula have rallied around the Science of Reading with initiatives unifying teacher practice and raising public expectations. Yet, they have not equally embraced the science of writing, leaving instruction in this area less coherent and more inconsistent. And yet, writing instruction often lacks a cohesive strategy, yielding inconsistent results and lost opportunities for students—especially those still learning the language or struggling to access complex content.

Research shows that explicit, strategy-based writing instruction boosts outcomes in language arts and across the curriculum, aiding comprehension in science, social studies, and math. Unlike the often-assumed approach that students “pick up” writing skills through exposure or creative tasks, evidence from leading scholars tells a different story:

• Explicit instruction in genre and strategy: When teachers model and scaffold how to plan, draft, revise, and check their writing, students show larger, faster gains in both narrative and informational text.
• Metacognition in writing: Teaching students how to regulate their own writing process—setting goals, self-monitoring, and reflecting—translates directly into higher achievement, greater confidence, and resilience.
• Writing to deepen learning: Structured writing tasks encourage students to organize their thinking, make connections, and solidify understanding in content areas.

Research-based writing instruction is the key to closing persistent gaps in achievement for students who are learning English or French or who require additional support.

Why “writing to learn” is vital:

• Increases information retention in all subjects
• Boosts performance on standardized assessments
• Improves student voice and participation, especially for multilingual learners

What SRSD Is and How It Complements Structured Literacy

SRSD stands for Self-Regulated Strategy Development. Developed from decades of rigorous research, it offers a clear, teacher-friendly framework that steps beyond “just write more” or “follow the writing process.” SRSD is about teaching powerful strategies and the self-regulation skills needed to apply them independently—across genres, grades, and linguistic backgrounds.

SRSD operates through six stages:

1. Develop Background Knowledge
2. Discuss It
3. Model It
4. Memorize It
5. Support It
6. Independent Performance

Each stage empowers students by mixing guided instruction, gradual release, and motivational scaffolding. Planning, drafting, revising, and editing become visible and actionable.

SRSD is not a ready-made curriculum with set lesson plans. Instead, it wraps around your existing provincial curriculum, aligning with British Columbia’s Core Competencies, Ontario Language (2023), Alberta’s new ELA updates, or any other regional priorities. This flexibility ensures SRSD can work in French Immersion and multilingual classrooms, secondary or elementary, and is particularly effective for students performing below grade level.

How SRSD Scales

SRSD is developmentally responsive. New K–1 training and resources support emergent writers, while adaptations for older elementary and secondary classrooms tie directly into key provincial expectations for argumentation, narrative writing, and informational text.

SRSD in Action:

Grade Level	Genre Focus	Provincial Curriculum Links
K-1	Simple stories, recount	Oral language, print concepts, writing
2-5	Narrative, opinion, info	Text structure, audience, self-editing
6-9	Argument, research	Inquiry, evidence, formal composition
10-12	Academic writing, essay	Critical thinking, analysis, synthesis

Teachers find that once SRSD is layered in, their instructional routines become more consistent—students know what to expect, and the classroom buzz changes from “what do I write?” to “how can I make my ideas stronger?”

The Evidence: What Districts Typically See by Month 3–4

Implementation science reminds us that real change shows up not only in test scores, but first in classroom routines and student attitudes, highlighting the importance of the science of writing in transforming educational practices. Three to four months after SRSD training, most districts report a series of consistent indicators:

• Faster writing plans—students spend less time stuck at the blank page.
• Stronger organization—writing takes on clearer beginnings, middles, and ends.
• Increase in revision and editing—students start to see writing as a craft, not a single draft.
• Significant growth in writing volume and stamina.
• Motivation and self-efficacy—students speak more confidently about their writing and are more willing to take risks.

Feedback often includes testimonial comments like, “She actually enjoys writing now- she asks if we have time for it! “or “His science journals are clearer, and he uses the strategy language without prompting.”

Careful studies confirm that SRSD’s impact extends beyond ELA scores. Students using SRSD strategies transfer the skills into reading comprehension and structured note-taking. Teachers in social studies and science report improved student explanations and summaries. This link between structured literacy and structured writing instruction is the “secret ingredient” that helps reading gains stick.

What Canadian Boards Ask Most Often (and How We Answer)

Will SRSD fit our provincial curriculum and pacing?

SRSD isn’t an “add-on”, it’s designed to enhance what you already do. Coaches work with instructional teams to map SRSD routines directly to provincial expectations and typical thematic units.

Can SRSD work in French Immersion or bilingual programs?

Absolutely. SRSD can be adapted for dual-language classrooms in Canada and the US, with strategy anchors and self-talk routines available in both languages.

How do you differentiate for students below grade level or ELLs?

The explicit, strategy-based approach at the heart of SRSD is especially powerful for students who require clarity, modeling, transcription, and more opportunities for guided practice. It seamlessly integrates with the creative process of writing. Instructional routines can be adapted using language supports, syntax guidance, and visual scaffolds, all while keeping expectations high.

How does this look in split grades or small rural schools?

SRSD routines and strategy language create shared reference points among multi-age groups, making it easier for teachers to model, confer, and provide feedback, regardless of grade splits.

What is the investment and can we sustain it?

Entry-level options allow even small boards or rural schools to start with focused pilots. Year 2 integration planning supports sustainability and cost savings, with coach and lead teacher training that builds internal expertise for the long term.

How Boards Can Get Started in One Term (And Scale in Year 2)

Schools don’t need to overhaul everything at once. The path to building evidence-based writing instruction can be mapped over two key phases:

Year 1 (Getting Started):

• Enroll primary classrooms or grade bands in an SRSD professional learning course with live support and tailored resource guides.
• Engage one or more instructional coaches in a master class, building leadership and troubleshooting capacity.

Year 2 (Scaling and Deepening):

• Expand SRSD routines across additional grades as initial cohorts share successes and strategies.
• Collaborate with curriculum leads to embed SRSD into language, French, and content area docs, including template strategy charts and student self-monitoring checklists.
• Leverage before-and-after student samples and peer-to-peer coaching as models for classroom practice.

A quick-reference roadmap, including sample timelines and checklists, helps each board integrate SRSD without disrupting existing assessment calendars or curriculum maps.

Ready to Close the Writing Gap?

Those leading literacy reform in Canada are making progress. Now, SRSD is positioned to address the writing side of the equation with the same rigor that redefined early reading by integrating principles from the science of writing. Districts and schools interested in practical, evidence-based writing improvement can connect for a school-specific discovery call to determine how SRSD aligns with your provincial curriculum, assessment cycle, and budget realities. The writing gap can close – and Canadian classrooms are ready.

---

The Science Behind Effective Writing Strategies

A New Era in Writing Instruction

Schools are grappling with a persistent challenge across the U.S., Canada, and beyond: how to improve student writing reliably. Despite decades of initiatives, countless curricula, and workshop-style programs, writing proficiency remains among the most elusive instructional outcomes. The stakes couldn’t be higher for instructional coaches, curriculum directors, and school administrators. Writing is foundational for academic success, career readiness, and critical thinking yet it is notoriously difficult to teach effectively at scale.

But what if there were a model that not only improved writing quality dramatically, but also supported students’ motivation, self-regulation, and long-term independence as writers? And what if that model was already validated across 15 years of meta-analytic research?

Meet Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD).

Developed by Dr. Karen Harris in the 1980s and rigorously studied, SRSD combines explicit strategy instruction with self-regulation tools to transform students’ writing skills. This blog synthesizes the findings from numerous peer-reviewed meta-analyses (2010—current) to show why SRSD is the most impactful writing intervention available today and what it means for school systems ready to address diverse student needs and raise the bar on writing.

What Is SRSD? A Proven Instructional Framework

Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) transforms writing instruction by explicitly teaching students how to think like writers. Rather than relying on isolated tips or rigid templates, SRSD equips students with flexible strategies they can internalize, adapt, and use independently across genres and task

The approach unfolds across six research-based writing instruction stages that build both writing skill and self-regulation:

1. Develop Background Knowledge – Build the foundation for strategy use.
2. Discuss It – Engage students in metacognitive conversations about writing.
3. Model It – Show the thinking behind expert writing decisions.
4. Memorize It – Ensure students can recall strategies with ease.
5. Support It – Scaffold and guide students as they take ownership.
6. Independent Performance – Fade support and celebrate self-directed writing.

Throughout SRSD instruction, students learn powerful, genre-specific strategies like TREE (opinion), TIDE (informative), and C-SPACE (narrative). Just as important, they develop habits of mind like setting goals, monitoring progress, and using self-talk to stay motivated.

The result? Writing becomes manageable, purposeful, and rewarding. SRSD demystifies the process and turns students into capable, confident communicators.

Meta-Analytic Findings: How SRSD Changes Writing Outcomes

Meta-analytic reviews from leading literacy researchers, including Steve Graham, Karen Harris, and others, provide compelling evidence that SRSD outperforms other writing interventions across multiple dimensions:

1. Writing Quality: Very Large Gains

SRSD consistently produces large effect sizes (1.1–1.3) in writing quality. These numbers are not just statistically impressive; they translate into visibly better writing, more organized essays, richer ideas, and clearer structure. Compared to most other interventions (including process writing and product-goal models), they yield moderate or small effects.

Key Insight: SRSD doesn’t just help students write more; it helps them write better, faster.

2. Writing Length: Moderate, Purposeful Gains

While SRSD’s primary focus is on quality, studies have also found moderate increases in writing length (average effect size ~0.47). But here’s the nuance: SRSD students learn to write more relevant content, not just longer essays. Their writing tends to be more efficient, with a higher density of key ideas.

Key Insight: SRSD encourages purposeful elaboration, not filler.

3. Genre-Specific Content: Exceptionally High Impact

Perhaps the most overlooked SRSD advantage is its effect on genre-specific writing. Studies report effect sizes as high as 2.4 when measuring inclusion of key genre elements. Students taught with SRSD produce persuasive arguments, informative reports, and compelling stories with all the required components and then some.

Key Insight: SRSD ensures students hit the mark for every genre they write in.

4. Beyond Writing Scores: SRSD Builds Stronger Learners

SRSD goes far beyond surface-level gains. It promotes deep learning behaviors that empower students as independent learners. By explicitly teaching goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-talk, SRSD helps students develop the metacognitive tools to navigate complex tasks across subjects. These are not just writing skills, they are life skills that build confidence, resilience, and academic independence.

5. Self-Regulation: Building Strategic Thinkers

Meta-analyses show that SRSD’s unique emphasis on self-regulation (goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-instruction) leads to stronger long-term outcomes. Students learn what to write and how to approach writing as a process.

Key Insight: SRSD doesn’t just produce better writing—it cultivates better writers.

6. Motivation and Self-Efficacy: From Reluctant to Empowered

SRSD has some of the largest reported effect sizes (1.0 to 2.5) on affective outcomes like confidence and writing motivation. It addresses various student needs through the use of mentor texts. Students who once dreaded writing come to see it as a skill they can master. This is crucial in environments where disengagement and low self-confidence hinder achievement.

Key Insight: With SRSD, motivation is not an afterthought—it’s an outcome.

Genre Versatility: One Framework, Multiple Applications

For school leaders, flexibility matters. SRSD is not limited to one type of writing. It has demonstrated strong effects in:

• Narrative writing (e.g., story grammar strategies)
• Opinion writing (e.g., TREE)
• Informative/explanatory writing (e.g., TIDE)

This cross-genre strength means a school doesn’t need to adopt multiple programs for each genre. Instead, SRSD offers a unifying, scalable model for writing across the curriculum.

Key Insight: SRSD is a one-stop solution for multi-genre writing instruction, embodying evidence-based practices.

How SRSD Compares to Other Writing Approaches

Let’s consider how SRSD stacks up against other commonly used instructional models, based on meta-analytic findings:

Instructional Method	Effect Size	Summary
SRSD (Strategy + Self-Regulation)	1.1 – 1.3	Highest impact method across genres
Strategy Instruction Only	~0.76	Moderate; lacks SRSD’s motivational and self-regulation components
Process Writing (Workshop Model)	~0.43	Helpful, but inconsistent and often unscaffolded
Product-Focused Goals	~0.55	Encourages structure, but limited without modeling
Minimal Guidance (Graphic Only)	~0.2 or less	Least effective – lacks direct instruction

Key Insight: SRSD’s comprehensive approach outperforms partial or minimal models by a wide margin.

Evidence for All Learners: SRSD Supports Equity

SRSD has demonstrated effectiveness for:

• Students with learning disabilities
• Students with behavioral challenges
• English learners
• Average and high-achieving students

Meta-analyses consistently show that SRSD delivers strong results across diverse populations, making it a rare example of an equity-driven instructional model that also raises the ceiling.

Key Insight: SRSD closes gaps while lifting the top.

SRSD Works in Real Classrooms – Not Just Research Labs

A critical concern for school leaders is whether research-based interventions translate to authentic classrooms. The evidence says yes.

In fact, in one meta-analysis, classroom teachers implementing SRSD achieved an effect size of 1.52—equivalent to that of researchers in controlled settings.

Key Insight: SRSD is not just research-proven; it’s teacher-powered.

What Implementation Looks Like in Schools

When implemented with fidelity, SRSD includes:

• Teacher training in explicit strategy instruction
• Modeling and think-aloud practices
• Self-regulation scaffolding
• Collaborative practice and goal setting
• Use of student-friendly mnemonics (POW, TREE, TIDE, etc.) tailored to meet student needs

Schools that have adopted SRSD often begin with one genre and scale up. Instructional coaches play a key role in building teacher capacity, guiding lesson modeling, and aligning SRSD to curriculum pacing.

Implications for School Leaders and Curriculum Planners

If your district is:

• Searching for writing interventions that actually move the needle
• Looking to reduce writing achievement gaps
• Facing demands to show data-driven impact

…then SRSD offers a high-leverage, research-backed solution.

Key actions for adoption:

1. Provide professional development rooted in the SRSD model
2. Start with one genre (opinion is often easiest) and build from there
3. Encourage peer modeling and instructional coaching
4. Integrate SRSD with your existing curriculum and writing rubrics
5. Use writing samples and student reflections as evidence of growth

Conclusion: SRSD Is the Writing Intervention You’ve Been Waiting For

The verdict is in. SRSD is not another passing trend or one-size-fits-all workbook. It is a rigorously tested, adaptable, and deeply effective approach to writing instruction that equips students with the skills and mindset to succeed.

For instructional coaches, administrators, and curriculum leaders, SRSD is a strategic investment with a high return. It promises better writing, stronger self-regulation, and empowered students.

If your goal is to bring writing instruction into the 21st century, grounded in research and driven by results, then the time for SRSD is now.

You’re not alone if you’re a teacher caught in the crossfire between phonics mandates and comprehension goals. The current landscape of literacy instruction is being shaped by two powerful movements: the Science of Reading and the Science of Learning, both of which rely heavily on research. While each contributes essential insights, they often focus on what we teach before students can read or write fluently. But what comes after? What helps students apply their foundational skills in real-world reading and writing tasks? Enter the Science of Writing, specifically, Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD).

This blog explores how SRSD, an evidence-based writing framework, seamlessly aligns with the cognitive principles underpinning the Science of Learning and helps solve one of literacy education’s most pressing problems: transfer, by drawing on extensive research in the field. We’ll also draw on a compelling essay by Harriett Janetos, “The Science of Reading Meets the Science of Learning: Fast-Tracking Phonics,” which underscores the risks of over-teaching foundational skills at the expense of meaningful literacy experiences.

The Problem: Over-teaching the Foundations, Underpreparing for Application

Harriett Janetos, a seasoned reading specialist, argues that we often spend too much time on foundational skills, especially phonics, and not enough on applying those skills and the knowledge gained in authentic contexts. In her words, “We over-teach foundational skills at our peril. It eats up precious classroom time that could have been focused on other goals, including time reading text representing a range of topics and genres, or providing explicit writing instruction.”

Her piece draws on cognitive scientists like Mark Seidenberg, who advises that phonics instruction should be short, focused, and sufficient to give students “escape velocity.” In other words, they just need enough decoding skills to be able to read real texts. Beyond that, foundational overkill can harm students by delaying exposure to reading, writing, and thinking that build comprehension, vocabulary, and long-term literacy.

So what’s missing? A way to move children from knowing how to read to knowing how to think through text. And that’s where the Science of Writing enters the equation.

The Science of Writing: What It Offers

The Science of Writing focuses on the strategies, scaffolds, and self-regulation tools students need to produce and comprehend written text. It’s not a separate silo. It’s the logical next step after phonics. Writing helps reinforce decoding, builds vocabulary, deepens understanding of syntax, enriches knowledge, and encourages students to make meaning.

Unfortunately, writing instruction often gets sidelined despite the importance of integrating effective communication strategies to enhance student learning. In many elementary classrooms, teachers may spend hours teaching students to decode, but precious little time is allocated to learning how to compose. When writing is taught, it’s often in the form of prompts and products, not process.

Yet writing is a cognitively demanding task that often requires explicit instruction to master effectively. It draws on students’ knowledge to enhance their skills. It also draws on executive functioning, attention, planning, and goal-setting. The act of writing makes students more aware of the structures and purposes of text, which can, in turn, improve reading comprehension. It’s a reciprocal relationship—and it needs structure.

Where SRSD Fits In: A Bridge Between Reading and Thinking

Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), developed by Dr. Karen Harris and Dr. Steve Graham, is an evidence-based instructional approach rooted in both the Science of Writing and Learning. It’s been tested in dozens of randomized controlled trials and is particularly effective for many learners, including students with disabilities, multilingual learners, and those performing below grade level.

SRSD is built on six recursive stages, each providing clear instructions to guide students through the writing process:

1. Develop Background Knowledge
2. Discuss It
3. Model It
4. Memorize It
5. Support It
6. Independent Performance

Each stage is designed to help students internalize genre knowledge (e.g., opinion, narrative, informative writing) and self-regulation strategies (e.g., goal setting, self-talk, and reflection).

This structure aligns with Carl Hendrick’s principles from How Learning Happens, particularly around transfer. Hendrick warns that activities that create the illusion of learning (like rote practice) can fail to prepare students for unfamiliar tasks. In contrast, SRSD builds toward transfer by teaching students what to do in their writing and how to monitor and adapt what they do.

Connecting the Dots: SRSD and the Science of Learning

Let’s take a few of Hendrick’s seven core principles of learning and show how SRSD embodies each one, particularly focusing on the role of writing in this approach:

1. Achievement Leads to Motivation

SRSD helps students experience success early and often. Mnemonics like TREE (Topic, Reason, Explanation, Ending) and TIDE (Topic, Important ideas, Details, Ending) simplify genre structures so students don’t feel lost, enhancing their understanding and expression in different writing genres. Seeing their writing improve through the creative process and creativity motivates them to keep going.

2. Learning Requires Effort and Retrieval

SRSD emphasizes repeated practice, active recall, and constant reading and writing to ensure students engage deeply with the material. Students don’t just hear about strategies; they memorize them, practice them with feedback, and apply them in varied contexts.

3. Novices vs. Experts Learn Differently

SRSD provides scaffolds (graphic organizers, sentence starters, modeled think-alouds) to support novices through explicit writing instruction. As students gain expertise, support fades, allowing for continuous assessment of their growing abilities.

4. Metacognition and Self-Regulation Matter

This is SRSD’s sweet spot. Students are taught to monitor their progress, use self-talk to stay focused, and reflect on their goals. These habits improve not only writing but learning across subjects.

5. Transfer Requires Varied Practice

SRSD explicitly teaches students to generalize strategies to other types of writing, enhancing their composition skills. It’s not locked into a single genre or prompt, allowing flexibility in applying various writing techniques.

In short, SRSD is not just a writing framework; it’s an evidence-based delivery system for the Science of Learning, supported by extensive research.

Why This Matters Right Now

We’re in a moment where schools are under pressure to “fix” reading, and rightly so. But in the rush to double down on phonics, we risk overlooking writing as the missing link.

Janetos’s blog offers a cautionary tale: if we spend all our time on foundational drills, we delay students’ ability to engage with meaningful writing and texts. She calls for a balanced approach that values decodable texts and knowledge-building. Her goal? Escape velocity.

SRSD helps students achieve this by reading more and writing with purpose, structure, and reflection. When students learn to craft an argument, tell a story, or explain a process, they gain knowledge and do more than hit standards. They’re becoming literate thinkers.

What This Looks Like in the Classroom

Imagine a third-grade classroom filled with children. The teacher has already taught basic decoding and spelling patterns, providing instruction that lays the foundation for more complex writing tasks. Now she shifts into opinion writing, integrating it seamlessly into the curriculum. Instead of jumping into a prompt cold, she introduces TREE: Topic sentence, Reasons, Explanations, Ending.

Students memorize TREE using hand gestures and chant it together. They read model essays and identify each part, building their knowledge of effective writing structures. Then, the teacher models writing an opinion essay out loud, pausing to say what she’s thinking: “I’m not sure this reason is strong enough. Let me go back and think of a better one.”

Students then plan their own essays using a graphic organizer. They talk with peers, write drafts, and set small goals (“Today I want to add stronger explanations”). Over time, they internalize not just how to write, but how to think while writing.

This isn’t just writing instruction. It’s a cognitive apprenticeship. And it reflects the very best of what we know from research.

What About Older Students?

Though this blog highlights elementary classrooms, SRSD is not just for younger learners. Its benefits are even more pronounced for middle and high school students who may have learned to decode but never mastered the art of writing.

In secondary classrooms, teachers can use SRSD and incorporate research to enhance writing instruction and:

• Teach content-area writing in science and social studies
• Improve performance on writing essays and constructed responses
• Support multilingual learners with explicit language structures in writing.
• Help students with IEPs organize their thinking and writing

The structure stays the same; the content and expectations adjust.

Conclusion: Toward a More Balanced, Transfer-Oriented Literacy Model

The Science of Reading has given us essential tools to build foundational skills. The Science of Learning reminds us that authentic learning requires retrieval, feedback, metacognition, and transfer. As delivered through SRSD, the Science of Writing ties it all together.

Harriett Janetos put it best: We don’t have a minute to spare teaching things that derail students from real reading and writing. SRSD is an instructional approach that honors both the science and the art of teaching. It equips students not just with skills but also with the confidence and cognitive flexibility to use those skills across disciplines.

If we want students to reach escape velocity, we must teach them to think, not just decode. When taught strategically through SRSD, writing can be the rocket that gets them there.

---

The education world is buzzing with talk of AI integration. From personalized learning to automated feedback, the promises are bold: smarter instruction, more engagement, greater equity. But with every new wave of innovation comes a quiet question we can’t afford to ignore: How do we move forward without losing what matters most? For those of us committed to explicit writing instruction through Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), the question isn’t whether to engage with AI. The question is how.

And for me, the answer right now is: with curiosity, yes. But also with caution.

Recently, I came across a framework called Content and AI Integrated Learning (CAIIL), introduced by Zoe Gavriilidou at the 11th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network, which highlights the potential role of tools like ChatGPT in education and teaching. This model adapts the familiar principles of CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) to AI literacy, blending subject-area learning with AI skills in a seamless, interdisciplinary way.

As someone who has spent years immersed in evidence-based writing instruction, I found myself both intrigued and a little apprehensive. The CAIIL model is smart. It is forward-thinking. And it has potential. But it also raises important questions about pedagogy, implementation, and what it really means to teach students to think as writers in an AI-mediated world.

So, what is CAIIL? And how might it connect to what we do in SRSD?

Understanding CAIIL: A Quick Overview

CAIIL stands for Content and AI-Integrated Learning. Rather than teaching AI as a stand-alone subject, CAIIL proposes integrating AI literacy into traditional subjects, like science, math, or in this case, language education.

In a CAIIL-based classroom, students might:

• Use an AI chatbot to simulate a conversation in a second language class.
• Explore how generative AI and machine learning models interpret and generate text.
• Reflect on ethical issues in AI through writing assignments.

In the language domain, this means AI is not just a technology tool (e.g., grammar checker, feedback generator, or AI writing tools). It becomes a topic of study and a medium for learning. Students might write essays on the ethics of facial recognition or use text generators to explore tone and revision.

The goal is not just using AI. It’s about understanding what it does well, where it falls short, and how to engage with it responsibly.

Before we go any further, I want to be clear: what you’re about to read is not a blueprint for immediate classroom implementation. It’s my crystal ball view of what might be possible in the near future. The following ideas are meant to spark curiosity and conversation, not to prescribe new teacher requirements. Think of this as a look ahead at the evolving intersection of writing instruction and AI integration, imagining how SRSD and something like CAIIL might someday work together to support students in becoming thoughtful, strategic writers in an AI-enhanced world.

Where SRSD and CAIIL Might Intersect

On the surface, SRSD and CAIIL serve different ends. SRSD is about giving students cognitive and metacognitive strategies for writing, grounded in self-regulation, modeling, and gradual release. CAIIL is about embedding AI literacy within content instruction.

But scratch the surface and you find some meaningful points of connection:

1. Metacognition at the Core

Both SRSD and CAIIL prioritize metacognitive growth. In SRSD, we model how to plan, monitor, and revise our writing. We make the thinking visible. In CAIIL, students are asked to think about how AI works, what it “knows,” what it guesses, and how it might reflect or reinforce bias.

This shared emphasis on reflective, deliberate thinking is a natural bridge.

2. Ethical and Critical Literacy

SRSD teachers already help students think critically about the content they read and write. CAIIL takes that one step further by asking students to interrogate the tools they use.

Imagine a lesson where students use AI to generate a draft and analyze its strengths and weaknesses using a strategy like TREE or TIDE. Not only are they applying SRSD strategies, but they’re also learning to question the source and quality of AI-generated language.

3. Scaffolded Integration

SRSD thrives on gradual release, modeling, collaborative practice, and independent application. If we ever adopt AI tools in our instruction, they must fit within that structure. We wouldn’t hand students a chatbot and say, “Good luck.” We would model how to use it, talk about when it’s helpful, set goals, and reflect, just like we do with every other writing strategy.

CAIIL aligns with this gradual integration, assuming teachers are given the training and space to implement it with purpose.

Real-World Example: 5th Grade Literacy Block 2028

Let’s say you’re a 5^th-grade teacher in the year 2028 and are working on opinion writing during your literacy block. You’ve already introduced the basics of a strong opinion essay using SRSD’s TREE strategy.

Now, you want to deepen your students’ thinking and give them a fresh way to engage with the writing process. Here’s how CAIIL might fit into your week:

1. Monday – Introduce the Topic You introduce a high-interest question: “Should schools use facial recognition to improve security?” Students brainstorm their opinions and discuss arguments for and against. You show a short, age-appropriate video that introduces both sides of the debate, including concerns about fairness and privacy.
2. Tuesday – Draft with AI Support Students write a first draft of their opinion paragraph. Then, they use a classroom-safe AI writing assistant to get revision suggestions. You walk them through comparing their original text with the AI’s suggestions.
   Together, you discuss: What did the generative AI do well? What did it miss? How can we use feedback without losing our own voice?
3. Wednesday – Focus on Tone and Audience Students explore how tone changes meaning by prompting the AI to rewrite their paragraph in a silly, sarcastic, or formal tone. They reflect on how tone shapes the message, and revise their writing with tone in mind.
4. Thursday – Ethics Discussion As a class, you read a short article about how AI can be biased. Students respond to questions like: Who creates AI tools? Can they be wrong? Then, they write a short reflection using self-regulation strategies from SRSD (e.g., goal-setting, self-talk) to explain how their thinking evolved.
5. Friday – Final Edits and Sharing Students revise and polish their essays using both peer and AI feedback. They self-assess their work using a checklist, and some choose to publish their essays on a classroom blog or present them in small groups.

Why I’m Not Ready to Jump In (Yet)

For all its promise, CAIIL also highlights some tensions that, honestly, we need to name.

1. The Risk of Losing the Writer’s Voice

AI tools can generate grammatically correct, well-organized text in seconds. But SRSD is about more than conventions and structure. It’s about helping students become writers to think, struggle, grow in confidence, develop their own voice, and engage in meaningful content creation.

Over-reliance on AI could short-circuit that process. If students outsource too much of their planning, drafting, or revising to a tool, they may never cultivate the habits of mind that SRSD is designed to cultivate.

2. Cognitive Load and Instructional Complexity

SRSD implementation already requires a thoughtful, staged approach. Adding AI tools and AI literacy content could complicate that. Do teachers have time to teach both writing strategies and AI ethics? What training will they need? Will AI become a distraction or a support?

We can’t assume that layering AI on top of writing instructions will automatically enhance it. Without careful integration, it could do more harm than good.

3. Equity and Access

SRSD levels the playing field by making expert writing processes visible and accessible to all students, especially those with learning differences. But AI access isn’t equal. Schools with stronger tech infrastructures can implement CAIIL-style tools, leveraging technology to enhance the educational experience. Others may be left behind.

This raises uncomfortable questions: Are we creating a new literacy gap? Are we prepared to support all students in becoming AI-literate, or just the ones with reliable internet and devices?

Protecting Our Educators

That said, any future that involves AI in the classroom must begin with a firm commitment to protecting and increasing the teacher’s value. Technology should never diminish the role of educators; it should make their work more impactful, human, and sustainable. As AI tools become more integrated into instruction, the teacher’s role becomes even more essential, not less. SRSD was never designed to be handed off to a device. It thrives on teacher-student interaction, modeling, feedback, and responsive teaching that only a real person can deliver. The teacher is not optional in this future. She is irreplaceable.

That’s why I remain hopeful. I believe AI can evolve into a powerful tool that supports, rather than undermines, the goals of SRSD. This is not done by taking over writing instruction but by extending it—helping students talk through their thinking, practice self-regulation strategies, or receive scaffolded feedback aligned to SRSD’s six stages. Imagine a generative AI that prompts students to revisit their writing goal before drafting, or offers TREE or TIDE planning tips without generating the plan. Picture students using voice-to-text tools to get their ideas down, then revising their own work with structured, teacher-informed prompts. These tools wouldn’t replace SRSD, they’d reinforce it, offering flexible, personalized support that complements what great teachers already do.

But this will only work if we build with intention. The future of generative AI in writing instruction must be rooted in equity, agency, and pedagogy, not efficiency for efficiency’s sake. Teachers must be involved in designing these tools, ensuring they reflect the complexities of real classrooms and respect the developmental process of becoming a writer. The goal isn’t to create shortcuts. It’s to deepen student learning while lightening teachers’ cognitive and logistical load alone. If we get this right, we won’t just protect the role of the teacher, we’ll prove, yet again, just how central they are to every meaningful leap forward in education.

What I’m Watching with Interest

I envision a future where AI deepens student thinking, lightens the load on teachers, and supports, rather than disrupts, the instructional heart of SRSD. Of course, we’re not there yet, but the groundwork is being laid, and I’m paying close attention.

Here are a few developments I find genuinely exciting:

AI for revision: Tools like Grammarly or ChatGPT, and other ai writing tools, when used after drafting, could help students spot patterns in their writing and reflect on revision choices, especially when paired with SRSD strategies for goal setting and self-talk.

AI as a think-aloud partner: Could we train AI to model strategic writing, complete with self-regulation and decision-making language? If so, it could one day reinforce SRSD stages by simulating the “I do” portion of instruction.

AI-supported goal setting and reflection: AI might prompt students to set writing goals before they begin, then guide them to reflect after writing: Did I meet my goal? What helped? What was hard? This would align directly with SRSD’s focus on building metacognitive awareness.

Exemplar comparison and revision modeling: AI could generate multiple versions of a student’s draft, highlighting unclear thinking or weak evidence alongside possible improvements, facilitating teaching moments for educators. Teachers could use these side-by-side comparisons to help students analyze structure, clarity, and persuasiveness through an SRSD lens.

Dashboards for SRSD-aligned feedback: I’m intrigued by the idea of teacher-facing dashboards that tag student writing for SRSD elements like TREE components, evidence of planning, or use of self-talk. This could support formative assessment and guide small-group instruction during Stage 5.

Scenario-based writing prompts: AI-driven storytelling tools could generate immersive, content-connected prompts (e.g., “You’re a scientist in 2050 explaining climate policy…”). This supports SRSD’s emphasis on writing across the curriculum and engaging students with meaningful topics.

Language learning through AI interaction: AI chatbots, as shown in the CAIIL framework, can simulate real-world dialogue. This could become a valuable and motivating extension of SRSD instruction for multilingual learners writing in English.

Prompt-to-publishing pipelines: With teacher guidance and careful instructional design, students could use AI writing tools to brainstorm, organize, and eventually publish their work in authentic formats, like classroom blogs, opinion pieces, or digital letters. Done thoughtfully, this preserves the integrity of the writing process while adding real purpose and audience.

Proceeding with Purpose

At SRSD Online, our mission has always been to put research into action, not to chase trends, but to equip teachers with what works. That won’t change.

But we also know that literacy is evolving with technology. Our students are already encountering AI in their daily lives. They need to understand it, question it, and use it wisely.

So, here’s where I land: We don’t need to adopt CAIIL tomorrow. But we do need to understand what it offers. We need to consider how it might inform our practice in the years ahead, not replace SRSD but enrich it in carefully chosen ways.

Let’s keep our eyes open. Let’s stay grounded in the science of writing. And let’s ask hard questions before we say yes.

If generative AI is going to be part of our students’ world, then we, as writing teachers involved in teaching writing and digital learning, need to be part of the conversation.

Further Reading & Resources:

• Zoe Gavriilidou, CAIIL Framework, iLRN 2025
• Linnea Ehri, Orthographic Mapping Theory
• ChatGPT in education: Methods, potentials, and limitations

Have thoughts or classroom experiences with AI in writing instruction? Email me at ra***@********ne.org. We’re all learning this together.

---

Training and Instructional Coaching Matter in SRSD Implementation.

At SRSD Online, we know that delivering outstanding professional development is just the beginning. Real, lasting change in writing instruction happens when high-quality training is paired with strategic, skillful instructional coaching.

Our Train-the-Trainer Instructional Coach model was built precisely for this reason: teachers need both expert instruction from expert coaching support to confidently bring Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) into their classrooms — and to sustain it over time.

A recent Instructional Coach blog by Jon Saphier, “Teacher Coaching: Building on the Foundation of PD to Achieve Transfer into Practice” (April 15, 2025), echoes what we have seen firsthand across hundreds of schools: Instructional Coaches should never replace PD. It must be the intentional, built-in next step to professional development coaching. Saphier’s insights validate the design of SRSD Online’s approach — and provide a broader research base for why it works.

Why SRSD Online’s Train-the-Trainer Model Aligns with the Best of Instructional Coach Research

1. We start with expert professional development, not vague ideas. Our courses teach teachers specific, research-validated writing strategies and self-regulation techniques, incorporating effective teaching strategies that enhance student engagement and classroom learning. We model what success looks like, break it down step-by-step, and support teachers through guided practice. As Saphier notes, “an effective instructional coach process must be married to expert instruction” you cannot coach what was never properly taught.

2. We link new skills to measurable student goals. SRSD is built on goal setting for writing quality, strategy use, and self-regulation. As Jim Knight (cited by Saphier) explains, connecting instructional coach change to goals for student growth makes success visible and meaningful for teachers. It’s not about “trying something new”; it’s about helping students achieve real gains.

3. We prioritize practice in safe, collaborative settings. Before ever bringing strategies to students, SRSD-trained teachers engage in instructional coaching conversations as they rehearse modeling, self-talk, think-alouds, and mnemonics with their peers. This reflects the research of Joyce and Showers (1982), who found that transfer into practice requires study, modeling, peer practice, and feedback not just instructional coaches assisting in isolation.

4. We embed structured, nonjudgmental instructional coaching. Our Train-the-Trainer program prepares an instructional coach to offer feedback based on clear SRSD performance criteria, incorporating elements of instructional coaching to support teachers effectively. It’s specific, actionable, and supportive never vague or evaluative. Teachers understand exactly what to improve and why it matters for their students.

5. We engage leadership to create a culture of experimentation. Saphier emphasizes that school leaders must be learners too. SRSD-trained administrators are encouraged to participate in PD with the instructional coach, try SRSD strategies themselves, observe teachers with a coaching lens, and celebrate experimentation. Vulnerability at the leadership level builds trust and accelerates change.

Why the Instructional Coach Matters

Too often, professional development promises a revolution in practice and then fizzles out. Teachers are left to struggle on their own, unsure if they’re “doing it right” or whether it’s even making a difference.

By pairing expert PD with ongoing, structured instructional coach assistance tied to student success, SRSD Online is changing that pattern. We’re seeing teachers not just try SRSD but own it, refine it, and achieve remarkable outcomes for their students.

Saphier’s article highlights what research has told us for decades: real instructional change requires an intentional system, not random hope. At SRSD Online, we are proud to offer that system built on decades of research, strengthened by today’s best instructional coach practices, and designed to empower educators at every level.

Building Relationships

One dimension that often receives too little attention in discussions of instructional coaching is relationship-building. Effective coaches begin by earning teachers’ trust: they listen without judgment, honor teacher expertise, and position themselves as partners rather than evaluators. When teachers sense psychological safety, they willingly try unfamiliar SRSD routines, such as think-aloud goal setting, and share the inevitable missteps that come with experimentation. This cycle of candid reflection and targeted support accelerates growth far more than surveillance-style walkthroughs ever could.

Feedback Loops

Coaching also thrives on tight feedback loops grounded in real student work. Powerful SRSD coaches schedule brief “data huddles” every two to three weeks, bringing annotated writing samples and rubric scores to the table. Together, teachers and coaches analyze where strategy use is breaking down perhaps students are skipping the POW+TREE planning organizer or under-utilizing self-monitoring checklists and pinpoint one high-leverage adjustment. Because teachers see the direct line between coaching feedback and immediate improvements in student drafts, their motivation to refine practice climbs.

Technology has opened new avenues for sustaining these feedback cycles without adding hours to the school day. Many SRSD districts now rely on secure video platforms that let teachers upload a quick iPad recording of a mini-lesson or conferencing session. Coaches respond with time-stamped comments, modeling alternative think-aloud language or showing how to scaffold goal setting more explicitly. Asynchronous video coaching keeps momentum alive in geographically dispersed schools, reduces travel costs, and gives busy teachers the autonomy to reflect when it best fits their schedule.

Generalization

Beyond individual classrooms, instructional coaching acts as the connective tissue that aligns writing instruction across grade bands. Coaches convene vertical teams where a fourth-grade teacher and a seventh-grade ELA specialist can compare SRSD strategy progressions and agree on common language for mnemonics like TIDE and TREE. This articulation prevents the “strategy cliff” many students face when they advance to a new grade level and encounter entirely different writing expectations. Consistent terminology and shared self-regulation routines build a district-wide culture of writer identity and perseverance.

Curriculum Integration

Coaches also play a critical role in integrating SRSD with existing curricula rather than layering it on as one more initiative. In schools using CKLA or Benchmark Advance, for instance, coaches map SRSD stages onto upcoming units, demonstrating how writing strategies POWre +TIDE can deepen informative writing embedded in a science module. This curricular threading reassures teachers that SRSD is not an additional burden but a lens that strengthens what they already teach. It likewise satisfies administrators looking for coherence with state standards and assessment frameworks.

Professional Advancement 

Districts that invest in an internal pipeline of SRSD coaches reap long-term rewards. Teacher-leaders who complete the Train-the-Trainer pathway often advance to mentoring roles, designing schoolwide writing celebrations, leading data dives, and guiding new hires through SRSD onboarding. Because these leaders emerge from within the faculty, they understand local constraints, speak colleagues’ language, and model a growth mindset that newcomers readily emulate. Over time, coaching capacity multiplies organically, reducing reliance on external consultants and safeguarding implementation fidelity amid staff turnover.

Increased Student Success

Compelling evidence underscores the payoff of this approach. A 2018 meta-analysis by Kraft, Blazar, and Hogan reported average effect sizes of +0.49 on instructional quality and +0.18 on student achievement when teachers received sustained coaching. When paired with SRSD, which already boasts medium-to-large writing effect sizes, districts can reasonably anticipate a double impact: stronger classroom practice and measurable gains on rubrics and standardized assessments alike. Importantly, these results emerge not from short-term workshops but from the iterative, goal-centered coaching cycles described above.

Return on Investment

Finally, instructional coaching produces a return on investment that extends beyond test scores. Teachers who feel supported and see tangible student growth report higher job satisfaction and are less likely to leave the profession. By promoting teacher efficacy and reducing turnover, districts conserve recruitment dollars and preserve institutional knowledge assets that cannot be captured by line-item budgeting but make or break sustained reform efforts.

Together, these elements fill critical gaps between professional development and classroom reality. They illustrate how SRSD Online’s Train-the-Trainer model does more than transmit knowledge; it builds a living, breathing infrastructure for continuous improvement. When coaches cultivate trust, harness data, leverage technology, align curricula, and seed leadership, they turn SRSD from a powerful workshop into a lasting engine of writing success.

Ready to Build a Culture of Writing Success?

If your district is ready to move beyond “one-and-done” PD and create real momentum in writing instruction, let’s talk. Our Train-the-Trainer program can help you build internal expertise, conduct a thorough assessment, provide strong instructional coach support with an experienced instructional coach, and create a sustainable writing achievement plan tailored to your schools, your students, and your goals.

Schedule a free Instructional Coach consultation with our team today to learn more.

Instructional Coach References:

• Saphier, J. (2025). *Teacher Coaching: Building on the Foundation of PD to Achieve Transfer into Practice.*Research for Better Teaching. 
• Knight, J. (2025). Five Myths About Professional Learning. EL Magazine.
• Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The Coaching of Teaching. Educational Leadership Magazine.
• Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588.

---

Research-Backed Strategies for Improved Writing Instruction

Editor’s Note: The insights and data in this blog are drawn from the peer-reviewed article “Overcoming Barriers and Paradigm Wars: Powerful Evidence-Based Writing Instruction” by Karen R. Harris and Debra McKeown, published in Theory Into Practice (2022, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp. 429–442). You can read the original article here.

Ask any educator: Can your students write well?

The honest answer, if we’re being data-driven and grounded in reality, is “no.” According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 24% of U.S. students in grades 8 and 12 are proficient in writing. Even more alarming, over half of students fall below the basic level, and the data hasn’t budged in decades. This is not just an academic problem; it’s a national crisis with long-term consequences for college, career, civic participation, and equity.

What’s worse, we’ve known about this problem for over 30 years. Yet writing remains the most under-prioritized, inconsistently taught, and misunderstood subject in K–12 education.

But what if we told you that we already have a solution that’s been extensively validated by over 120 studies and produces the largest gains in student writing outcomes of any instructional approach?

That solution is Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), and it’s time more districts knew about it.

Writing: The Skill That Opens Every Door

Before we dive into SRSD, let’s talk about why writing matters so deeply.

Writing is not just a language arts skill but a crucial component of developing strong writing skills that students rely on throughout their education and beyond. It’s the foundation for expressing thinking across subjects. Students use writing to demonstrate understanding in science and social studies, to craft arguments in civics, to reflect in math journals, and to respond to prompts on every standardized test they’ll encounter. Beyond school, writing is essential for securing jobs, advocating for change, participating in democracy, and building one’s personal identity.

And yet, most students aren’t getting the instruction they need.

• Only 10% of African-American and 13% of Hispanic students score proficiently.
• Students with disabilities and English learners fare even worse.
• The gap between what students are asked to do (e.g., write an argument or an analysis) and what they’ve been taught to do is immense.

The result: writing becomes a gatekeeper skill, dividing students not by potential, but by opportunity.

Why Writing Instruction Falls Short

The root causes of this crisis are many and interconnected. Harris and McKeown outline several in their groundbreaking article:

1. Literacy Wars in Writing Instruction

There’s a long-standing divide in education between those who champion structured, strategy-based instruction and those who promote process-oriented approaches like writers’ workshop, highlighting the need for a balanced writing process. These “literacy wars” have fueled false dichotomies, leaving teachers caught in the crossfire.

But here’s the truth: it’s not about choosing between structure and creativity. Students need both.

Structure gives students the tools and confidence to get started, while creativity gives them purpose and voice. Without structure, many students flounder, unsure how to begin or what to include. Without creativity, writing becomes mechanical and disconnected. When we bring both together, students don’t just learn how to write; they learn to think, express, and revise with intention.

2. Poor Teacher Preparation

The majority of teacher preparation programs do not include a dedicated course on how to teach writing. Instead, writing instruction is often briefly addressed within general reading methods courses- if it’s covered at all. This limited exposure leaves many new teachers underprepared to teach writing effectively, especially when it comes to supporting multilingual learners or students with disabilities. As a result, teachers enter classrooms without the specialized knowledge or tools needed to address the wide range of writing needs they’ll encounter, reinforcing the misconception that writing instruction is intuitive or secondary to reading.

3. Flawed Curriculum Adoption Processes

When selecting writing curricula, districts rarely prioritize whether the program is backed by rigorous evidence of effectiveness. Instead, decisions are often driven by factors like brand recognition, affordability, alignment with existing digital platforms, or the ability to integrate seamlessly into broader ELA packages. While these considerations may seem practical, they often overshadow the most critical question: Does this program actually improve student writing outcomes? 

As a result, schools end up investing in materials that look polished, fit logistical needs, and satisfy procurement checklists but lack a proven track record in helping students become stronger, more confident writers. This widespread pattern contributes to stagnant writing achievement and leaves educators without the tools they need to support diverse learners.

4. Time Constraints and Testing Pressures

Most teachers report having little time to devote to writing instruction, especially beyond the early grades. After third grade, writing time often shrinks to just 15 minutes a day or disappears altogether in non-tested years. This leaves little room for students to engage in the full writing process, including planning, revising, and reflecting on their work. By high school, the expectation shifts: content-area teachers often assign writing but rarely provide explicit instruction on how to write.

The pressures of high-stakes testing compound the problem. In many districts, when writing is tested, the focus shifts to formulaic prompts that reward surface-level responses rather than authentic, thoughtful expression. Teachers are urged to “teach to the test,” emphasizing narrow skills instead of helping students develop as real writers. The result is a system that sidelines deep writing instruction just when students need it most.

Enter Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD): The Missing Piece

SRSD is an instructional framework based on evidence-based practices developed over 40 years by Drs. Karen Harris and Steve Graham. It has been tested in diverse classrooms across the U.S. and internationally- from rural Title I schools to inclusive urban classrooms- and consistently shows large effect sizes on student writing performance.

What Makes SRSD So Effective?

SRSD combines explicit writing strategies with self-regulation, goal-setting, modeling, and student ownership. It is:

• Learner-centered: Students take control of their writing process.
• Teacher-guided: Educators model cognitive and metacognitive processes.
• Genre-specific: Instruction is tailored to opinion, informative, and narrative writing.
• Developmentally responsive: SRSD works from grades K-12, becoming more sophisticated with age.
• Motivation-enhancing: Students learn positive self-talk, build writing stamina, and develop confidence.

One student, after learning with SRSD, summed it up best: “Of course I can write now, someone taught me how.”

SRSD in Practice

SRSD is an evidence-based approach to writing instruction that guides students from initial understanding to complete independence. Rather than dropping students into writing assignments unprepared, SRSD provides a clear, supportive structure that helps them build the background knowledge, motivation, and self-confidence they need to succeed. Teachers use a flexible progression of instructional moves- introducing strategies, modeling them aloud, practicing together, and gradually stepping back as students take the lead. This approach supports all learners, including those who struggle with writing or have never seen themselves as writers.

At the heart of SRSD are easy-to-remember strategies like TREE for opinion writing or TIDE for informative writing. These mnemonics help students organize their thoughts and understand what strong writing looks like, but they’re not rigid templates. Instead, they act as scaffolds, giving students a dependable starting point while encouraging creativity, voice, and self-reflection. Over time, students internalize the strategies, set their own writing goals, monitor their progress, and revise with intention. The result is better writing and more confident, independent thinkers who understand how to tackle challenging tasks.

Debunking the Myths About SRSD

Despite its strong track record, SRSD faces resistance, often rooted in misunderstandings. Harris and McKeown address five pervasive myths:

Myth	Truth
SRSD is only for students with disabilities	SRSD is effective for all students, including those in general education
Researchers get better results than teachers	Classroom teachers achieve equal or better outcomes
SRSD is expensive and hard to learn	Materials are low-cost or free; PD is scalable and practical
SRSD is rigid and formulaic	Students learn to write with creativity and control, not by following a script
SRSD harms multilingual or marginalized students	SRSD promotes equity, self-expression, and empowerment

Why SRSD Isn’t Everywhere—Yet

So why hasn’t SRSD been adopted at scale?

Because scaling evidence-based writing instruction requires more than research, it requires dismantling systemic barriers.

• Teacher prep programs need to make writing instruction and handwriting a priority.
• Districts must evaluate materials based on effectiveness, not brand.
• Administrators must prioritize planning to allocate time and PD resources for real instructional change.
• Educators must see themselves as both writing teachers and writing role models, continuously developing their own writing skills to effectively inspire and guide their students.

SRSD doesn’t demand that schools abandon their current practices. It integrates with existing structures like writers’ workshops, mentor texts, content-area writing, and intervention blocks. It can start small within a classroom, a grade level, or a pilot team and grow from there.

The Real Cost of Inaction

Delaying meaningful reform in writing instruction comes at a steep price- one paid by students every single day. Writing is not just a skill for English class; it’s a foundational tool for learning, thinking, and communicating across all subjects. Yet in too many schools, writing remains an afterthought squeezed into leftover minutes or ignored entirely outside of testing years. To serve students well, writing must be treated as a core component of a school’s instructional vision, on equal footing with reading, math, and science.

When writing and spelling aren’t taught explicitly and consistently, the consequences ripple across a student’s entire education and future. Without strong writing instruction:

• Students struggle to express what they know, even when they understand the content.
• Test performance suffers across subjects, not just in writing, but in science, history, and even math, where written explanations are often required.
• College and career opportunities become limited, as students are unprepared to write essays, reports, or professional communications.
• The equity gap widens, with students from underserved communities falling even further behind their peers who have access to stronger instruction.

Inaction isn’t neutral- it actively disadvantages the very students who rely most on school to equip them for success.

A Path Forward: What Schools Can Do Now

1. Start with a Pilot: Choose a small team of teachers to implement SRSD. Offer them time, PD, and peer support.
2. Train Coaches and Facilitators: Build internal capacity through self-paced or supported training that aligns with your school’s goals.
3. Integrate SRSD Into Existing Structures: Use it during your writing block, within content areas, or as Tier 1 instruction.
4. Use Research to Inform Curriculum Decisions: Ask vendors: “What’s the evidence base?” And mean it.
5. Celebrate Student Voice: Use SRSD as a way to promote identity, advocacy, and joy in writing.

Final Thought

The writing crisis in our schools is real, but it is solvable. SRSD offers a powerful instructional method and a path toward equity, engagement, and academic growth for all students.

It’s time to stop asking if our students can write.

It’s time to start giving them the strategies and support to prove they can.

Further Reading:
Harris, K. R., & McKeown, D. (2022). Overcoming barriers and paradigm wars: Powerful evidence-based writing instruction. Theory Into Practice, 61(4), 429–442. Read it here

---