{"title":"有学习障碍及有学习障碍风险的学生及英语学习者的科学写作干预研究:系统回顾","authors":"Yewon Lee, Susan De La Paz","doi":"10.1177/07319487211018213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Writing in science can be challenging for all learners, and it is especially so for students with cognitive or language-based learning difficulties. Yet, we know very little about how to support students with learning disabilities (LD) or who are English learners (EL) when asked to write for authentic purposes during science instruction. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of 14 high-quality studies to identify effective writing instruction elements for students with LD, those who are EL, and for at-risk learners more generally. We analyzed the studies according to purpose, participants, dependent variables, and interventions. Then, we categorized instructional elements into two broad types of support: (a) cognitive skills and processes and (b) linguistic skills and processes. Quantitative analyses showed students (regardless of disability or language status) who received structured cognitive instruction on text features demonstrated substantial growth in writing. Conversely, although language in science differs from everyday language, it is absent from this literature. Thus, our findings provide insights into necessary cognitive and linguistic supports for these students, and implications for designing effective writing instruction.","PeriodicalId":47365,"journal":{"name":"Learning Disability Quarterly","volume":"44 1","pages":"261 - 274"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07319487211018213","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Science Writing Intervention Research for Students With and At Risk for Learning Disabilities, and English Learners: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Yewon Lee, Susan De La Paz\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07319487211018213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Writing in science can be challenging for all learners, and it is especially so for students with cognitive or language-based learning difficulties. Yet, we know very little about how to support students with learning disabilities (LD) or who are English learners (EL) when asked to write for authentic purposes during science instruction. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of 14 high-quality studies to identify effective writing instruction elements for students with LD, those who are EL, and for at-risk learners more generally. We analyzed the studies according to purpose, participants, dependent variables, and interventions. Then, we categorized instructional elements into two broad types of support: (a) cognitive skills and processes and (b) linguistic skills and processes. Quantitative analyses showed students (regardless of disability or language status) who received structured cognitive instruction on text features demonstrated substantial growth in writing. Conversely, although language in science differs from everyday language, it is absent from this literature. Thus, our findings provide insights into necessary cognitive and linguistic supports for these students, and implications for designing effective writing instruction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"261 - 274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/07319487211018213\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Disability Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487211018213\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Disability Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487211018213","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Science Writing Intervention Research for Students With and At Risk for Learning Disabilities, and English Learners: A Systematic Review
Writing in science can be challenging for all learners, and it is especially so for students with cognitive or language-based learning difficulties. Yet, we know very little about how to support students with learning disabilities (LD) or who are English learners (EL) when asked to write for authentic purposes during science instruction. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of 14 high-quality studies to identify effective writing instruction elements for students with LD, those who are EL, and for at-risk learners more generally. We analyzed the studies according to purpose, participants, dependent variables, and interventions. Then, we categorized instructional elements into two broad types of support: (a) cognitive skills and processes and (b) linguistic skills and processes. Quantitative analyses showed students (regardless of disability or language status) who received structured cognitive instruction on text features demonstrated substantial growth in writing. Conversely, although language in science differs from everyday language, it is absent from this literature. Thus, our findings provide insights into necessary cognitive and linguistic supports for these students, and implications for designing effective writing instruction.
期刊介绍:
Learning Disability Quarterly publishes high-quality research and scholarship concerning children, youth, and adults with learning disabilities. Consistent with that purpose, the journal seeks to publish articles with the potential to impact and improve educational outcomes, opportunities, and services.