Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review

Despite the importance of spelling for both writing and reading, there is considerable disagreement regarding how spelling skills are best acquired. During this and virtually all of the last century, some scholars have argued that spelling should not be directly or formally taught as such instruction is not effective or efficient. We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of experimental and quasiexperimental studies to address these claims. The corpus of 53 studies in this review included 6,037 students in kindergarten through 12th grade and yielded 58 effect sizes (ESs) that were used to answer eight research questions concerning the impact of formally teaching spelling on spelling, phonological awareness, reading, and writing performance. An average weighted ES was calculated for each question and the quality of included studies was systematically evaluated. Results provided strong and consistent support for teaching spelling, as it improved spelling performance when compared to no/unrelated instruction (ES = 0.54) or informal/ incidental approaches to improving spelling performance (ES = 0.43). Increasing the amount of formal spelling instruction also proved beneficial (ES = 0.70). Gains in spelling were maintained over time (ES = 0.53) and generalized to spelling when writing (ES = 0.94). Improvements in phonological awareness (ES = 0.51) and reading skills (ES = 0.44) were also found. The positive outcomes associated with formal spelling instructi

A comprehensive meta-analysis of handwriting instruction

While there are many ways to author text today, writing with paper and pen (or pencil) is still quite common at home and work, and predominates writing at school. Because handwriting can bias readers’ judgments about the ideas in a text and impact other writing processes, like planning and text generation, it is important to ensure students develop legible and fluent handwriting. This meta-analysis examined true- and quasi-experimental intervention studies conducted with K-12 students to determine if teaching handwriting enhanced legibility and fluency and resulted in better writing performance. When compared to no instruction or non-handwriting instructional conditions, teaching handwriting resulted in statistically greater legibility (ES = 0.59) and fluency (ES = 0.63). Motor instruction did not produce better handwriting skills (ES = 0.10 for legibility and −0.07 for fluency), but individualizing handwriting instruction (ES = 0.69) and teaching handwriting via technology (ES = 0.85) resulted in statistically significant improvements in legibility. Finally, handwriting instruction produced statistically significant gains in the quality (ES = 0.84), length (ES = 1.33), and fluency of students’ writing (ES = 0.48). The findings from this meta-analysis provide support for one of the assumptions underlying the Simple View of Writing (Berninger et al., Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 291–304, 2002): text transcription skills are an important ingredient in writing and writing development

Research-based writing practices and the Common Core : Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis

In order to meet writing objectives specified in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), many teachers need to make significant changes in how writing is taught. While CCSS identified what students need to master, it did not provide guidance on how teachers are to meet these writing benchmarks. The current article presents research-supported practices that can be used to meet CCSS writing objectives in kindergarten to grade 8. We identified these practices by conducting a new meta-analysis of writing intervention studies, which included true and quasi-experiments, as well as single-subject design studies. In addition, we conducted a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies examining the practices of exceptional literacy teachers. Studies in 20 previous reviews served as the data source for these analyses. The recommended practices derived from these analyses are presented within a framework that takes into account both the social contextual and cognitive/motivational nature of writing

Self-regulated strategy development in writing: Going beyond NLEs to a more balanced approach

In this article, we present an argument for consideration by those researching and promoting new learning environments (NLEs). We believe advocates of NLEs should consider the literature and research base indicating effective instruction is not based on a forced dichotomy between theoretical perspectives, but rather a thoughtful, pragmatic blending of practices based on evidence gained from various perspectives and lines of research. While unguided or minimally guided instructional approaches are popular and intuitively appealing, these approaches ignore substantial evidence indicating these approaches are less effective and less efficient than instructional approaches that incorporate guidance of the learning process that is faded as internal guidance is developed (Kirschner et al., Educ Psychol 41:75–86, 2006). We illustrate how integrating evidence from multiple theoretical perspectives leads to the development of more powerful approaches to learning and instruction through a review of the premises, evolution, and research behind Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) in the area of writing

Using Self-Regulated Strategy Development to Support Students Who Have 'Trubol GitingThangs Into Werds'

Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) is a well-established, thoroughly validated instructional model used to teach a variety of writing strategies to elementary, middle, and high school aged students. In this article, an overview of SRSD is presented. Specifically, this includes a discussion about why students struggle with various aspects of the writing process and an explanation of how strategy instruction is uniquely well suited for writing instruction. Next, the SRSD stages are described and an example of how SRSD was used to teach a story grammar strategy to fifth-grade students is offered. Finally, the principles for evaluation and characteristics of effective instruction are discussed and additional resources are listed

Molecular Characterization of the Plasma Membrane H(+)-ATPase, an Antifungal Target in Cryptococcus neoformans

The Cryptococcus neoformans PMA1 gene, encoding a plasma membrane H(+)-ATPase, was isolated from a genomic DNA library of serotype A strain ATCC 6352. An open reading frame of 3,380 nucleotides contains six introns and encodes a predicted protein consisting of 998 amino acids with a molecular mass of approximately 108 kDa. Plasma membranes were isolated, and the H(+)-ATPase was shown by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis to be slightly larger than the S. cerevisiae H(+)-ATPase, consistent with its predicted molecular mass. The plasma membrane-bound enzyme exhibited a pH 6.5 optimum for ATP hydrolysis, K(m) and V(max) values of 0.5 mM and 3.1 μmol mg(−1) min(−1), respectively, and an apparent K(i) for vanadate inhibition of 1.6 μM. ATP hydrolysis in plasma membranes and medium acidification by whole cells were inhibited by ebselen, a nonspecific H(+)-ATPase antagonist which was also fungicidal. The predicted C. neoformans protein is 35% identical to proton pumps of both pathogenic and nonpathogenic fungi but exhibits more than 50% identity to PMA1 genes from plants. Collectively, this study provides the basis for establishing the Cryptococcus H(+)-ATPase as a viable target for antifungal drug discovery