Productivity Apps Supporting Higher Order Writing Skills for Secondary Students With Learning Disabilities

Abstract

Students with learning disabilities tend to focus on lower-level elements of writing, leading them to compose poorly organized paragraphs comprised of strings of linear ideas. Deficits in language and working memory negatively impact ability to produce quality writing. Technology and software applications can provide a means of academic supports for students with disabilities. Four productivity applications (i.e., apps) that encourage focusing on higher-order writing skills and support cognitive load are presented for use with secondary students. These apps are combined to provide teachers with a step-by-step technique for instructing students to write a quality expository paragraph.

Keywords

writing higher-order writing learning disabilities productivity apps mobile apps

To be successful in school and employment, students must be able to effectively communicate their ideas in writing (Graham, Harris, & Hebert, 2011; Graham, Harris, & Santangelo, 2015; Graham & Perin, 2007; Hoover, 2013). Data from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (2011) reveal only 27% of all 8th- and 12th-grade students are proficient writers; and for students with learning disabilities (LD), it is a meager 5%. In an effort to ensure that every student succeeds, there is an increased focus on writing skills across content areas (Graham & Harris, 2013; National Governors, 2010; Straub & Alias, 2013). Unfortunately, writing is the content area teachers feel least prepared to teach (Gilbert & Graham, 2010).

Writing is a complex process that requires multiple, simultaneous tasks and task-management activities (Harris, Graham, & Mason, 2002; Peterson-Karlan, 2015; Vanderberg & Swanson, 2007). For students with LD, language deficits, and deficits in working memory, management of the writing process is very difficult (Graham & Harris, 2009; Greer, Crutchfield, & Woods, 2013; National Joint Committee, 1990; Swanson & Siegel, 2001).

In contrast to proficient writers, students with LD tend to focus their revising and editing strategies on lower order writing skills (see Figure 1) and consider the writing to be good quality if spelling and punctuation are correct and the writing is legible (Gillespie & Graham, 2014; Wong, 1997). Research has shown that focusing instruction on higher order skills such as development of ideas, organization, and focus leads to greater gains in writing achievement (Graham & Harris, 2016). Additional supports known to improve writing skills for students with disabilities include self-regulation (Graham, Harris, & McKeown, 2013), providing graphic organizers to generate and organize ideas (Baker, Gersten, & Graham, 2003; Dexter & Hughes, 2011; Englert, Zhao, Dunsmore, Collings, & Wolbers, 2007), and using software with word-prediction and spell-check features to support transcription and editing (Graham et al., 2015; Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012; Graham & Perin, 2007).

Figure 1.

Unit level foci.

Assistive technology (AT) is a mandatory consideration when developing an individualized education program (Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004). Mobile devices can serve as a form of AT and are widely available to students. In 2015, 92% of students in 4th through 12th grade reported owning a smartphone, laptop, or tablet, and 97% reported using the devices regularly (Pearson, 2015). With the increased regularity of student accessibility to technology, students with mild to moderate disabilities now have more access to Internet-based and mobile AT supports. Access to portable AT supports will continue to grow given the decrease in costs, increase in cultural acceptance and the global marketplace, and increased availability of mobile apps (Boone & Higgins, 2015).

With this trend, there is a need to inform teachers how to instruct students to use apps that support deficit areas. Four productivity apps, which support focusing on higher order writing skills have been selected for an integrative, step-by-step process to compose an informational paragraph. These steps could be easily manipulated to improve the quality of other paragraphs in different writing genres (i.e., argumentation, narrative) and to improve the quality of multiparagraph documents.

App Descriptions

Apps chosen for this technique (see Table 1) were limited to those that could support higher-order writings skills of student- or teacher-selected content by transferring some of the management task of writing process skills to the app. Using technology to support process skills allows students to focus on higher-order writing skills as opposed to allowing these aspects of their disability to limit them to lower-order skills. Selected apps are available for the Apple, Android, and Windows platforms (see Table 1). Several apps were excluded due to functional instability, low-quality English writing in the description, or descriptions written in a language other than English (i.e., Paragraph Writer, Paragraph Writing, Writing Wizard, English Writing Skills, Writing—Easy, Paragraph, Story). Apps that were instructional aids for learning about paragraph writing were also excluded (i.e., Essay Writing Lite, Academic Writing in English). Apps that were designed to be practice activities, or that could not be adapted to the content needs of the student’s writing purpose, were not included.

Table 1.

Mobile Apps to Support Higher-Order Writing Skills.

App	Cost	Capabilities	Skills Supported	Objective	Devices	Suggested Writing Process Steps
Simple Mind Plus	Free, or $4.99 upgrade^a	Mind mapping Color-coding ideas Relationship lines	Organization Focus	Students will brainstorm, organize, and develop paragraph topic ideas	Apple iPad Android Tablet Laptop Chromebook	Prewriting Revising
Phraseology	$1.99	Highlight word types Reorganize sentence Reorganize paragraphs Syllable count Word count Readability level	Word choice Organization Clarity Focus Revision	Students will improve word choice, paragraph length, and readability level	Apple iPad	Drafting Revising Editing
Writer’s Diet Test	Free	Highlight word types Bar-graph word-type display Focus assessment	Word Choice Focus	Students will develop ideas using words associated to the topic	Laptop Chromebook	Revising Editing
Hemingway App	Free	Highlighted word types Synonym suggestions Word count Readability level	Word choice Clarity	Students will increase rigor and active voice	Laptop Chromebook	Drafting Revising Editing

Apple iPad app cost; also available as a free 30-day trial for laptop/Chromebook.

Simple Mind Plus

Simple Mind Plus is a free visual idea-organization tool commonly referred to as a mind map. Simple Mind Plus can be used for students to store and structure their writing ideas by creating color-coded idea bubbles in a hierarchical format. Each idea bubble is visually linked to its subordinate bubbles with the same background fill color and matching-colored connection lines that shows relationships between the bubbles. The bubbles can be manipulated to reassign relationships or relocate ideas to a different hierarchical level, allowing students to reorganize ideas so that the paragraph ideas are presented in a logical order. Similar mapping organization tools are available for mobile devices (i.e., Mindly, Inspiration, EDNA, Popplet). Simple Mind plus is available for download to mobile devices through app stores (e.g., Google Play, iTunes).

Phraseology

Phraseology is useful to help students with written sentence and paragraph organization as well as word choice. Text can be created or copied into the app. In the arrange mode, each sentence is listed horizontally in a block. Each block has a placeholder that can be clicked on to easily drag and drop the sentence to a new location within the paragraph, allowing students to easily shuffle complete sentences to improve organization, focus, and clarity. This feature saves students the cognitive load effort of managing the cut and paste task in a typical word processing program (i.e., precision highlighting, cutting, moving curser precisely to new location, remembering there is a sentence on the clipboard and possibly its content, and performing necessary keystrokes to paste the sentence).

In the inspect mode, students have the option to have types of words highlighted in different colors. For example, all nouns are blue and all adjectives are red. With all the nouns highlighted blue, students could be instructed to look for an easily identifiable red adjective in front of each blue noun. Nouns without adjectives could be reconsidered to determine if there is a descriptive adjective that could be added, thereby increasing the focus and clarity of the student’s writing.

Phraseology also gives word count statistics such as average syllables per word, words per sentence, and reading level. These statistics could be used to set word count goals to expand ideas and elevate the quality of student’s writing. After making revisions, the text can be shared easily using methods common to other software programs such as copy and paste, email, or text message. It also can be saved to other apps on the iPad such as Dropbox or Notes. Phraseology is available for download to handheld mobile devices through app stores (e.g., Google Play, iTunes).

Writer’s Diet Test

Although this is not available as a downloadable app to a handheld device, Writer’s Diet Test is available on mobile devices such as a laptops or Chromebooks via the Internet. Writer’s Diet Test provides color-coded, bar-graph feedback total counts of each type of word in the paragraph (e.g., nouns, prepositions). This color-coded word-type feature is similar to Phraseology. In contrast, the Writer’s Diet Test display is a color-coded bar graph and may be more easily understood.

The Writer’s Diet Test also rates the fitness level of the text by determining how clearly and concisely the paragraph is written. Ratings are on a continuum from best to worst: lean, fit & trim, needs toning, flabby, and heart attack territory. The feedback can be used by students to revise for clarity. Because it does not work on paragraphs of fewer than 100 words, students must expand their ideas to meet this minimum, encouraging students to lengthen their writing. The Writer’s Diet Test also has a companion book, The Writer’s Diet (Sword, 2015), which teachers could incorporate into their lessons, or students could study outside of class. The Writer’s Diet Test is accessible at http://writersdiet.com/?page_id=4.

Hemingway App

Hemingway App is also an Internet-based app for use on a mobile laptop or Chromebook. It is designed to give color-coded feedback analysis of voice, vocabulary, and readability. As text is typed or pasted into the app, Hemingway produces a colorful version that highlights instances of passive voice, vocabulary improvement suggestions, and the readability level of the text. Although it has similar color coding as Phraseology, the Hemingway App does not have the capability to reorganize sentences easily. Hemingway App is accessible at http://www.hemingwayapp.com.

Combining the Apps

Before teaching how to use the apps, teachers should decide on which higher-order skill to focus instruction based on student need (see Table 2). Teachers will find each app either is self-explanatory or provides usage instructions. However, for students with LD, teachers will need to become familiar with the app and then provide students with direct and explicit instruction on how to use the app.

Table 2.

Written Expression Characteristics.

Unit	Struggling Writers	Proficient Writers
Word	Poor spelling Incorrect capitalization Improper connotation (emotion) Improper denotation (definition) Wrong synonym	Correct spelling Correct capitalization Proper word choice
Sentence	Incorrect punctuation Short, choppy sentence (i.e., S-V-O) Incorrect word order Missing/wrong article (e.g., the, an*) Missing/wrong word Lack of subject/verb Incorrect tense (e.g., past, present, future) Incorrect form (e.g., singular/plural)	Proper word order Proper word choice Variety of compound/complex sentences. Correct use of articles (e.g., the, an) Subject/verb/tense/form agreement
Paragraph	Missing topic sentence Ideas ramble/disagree Wandering/emerging ideas Incorrect order of ideas Lack of idea development Includes off-topic ideas Inappropriate/lack of transition	Clear thesis/topic Specific connections to main idea Relevant/concrete ideas Coherent flow of ideas Ideas supported with details Meets purpose (e.g., introduction, body, conclusion) Displays author’s personality/voice
Document	Lacks support to task Inappropriate/lack of structure Lacks introduction/conclusion Lacks transitions	Evidence of text structure Coherent flow of ideas Use of transitions Meets purpose (e.g., persuasive, informative) Written to a specific audience

S-V-O = subject, verb, object.

The individual apps can be combined in a step-by-step process to aid students in writing an expository paragraph (see Figure 2). Using the apps in this manner can help students focus on higher order writing skills and meet four objectives. Teachers will notice that there is some overlap in functionally between the apps, so these steps could be slightly altered based on teacher and/or student preference.

Figure 2.

Combining apps into the writing process.

Teaching the Apps

Each of the apps has a variety of capabilities that can be incorporated to using technology to support higher order expository paragraph writing skills. The following describes the minimum capabilities that should be taught to students (see Figure 3). Additional capabilities subsequently can be explored and incorporated, but these minimums should be explicitly taught to students.

Figure 3.

Instruction and demonstration checklist.

Simple Mind Plus

Students will need to know how to use the basic functions of Simple Mind Plus. There are two terms students will need to know to understand the hierarchy of the mind map: sibling and child. A sibling bubble is organizationally at an equal level whereas a child bubble is a sub-idea of the parent bubble. These sub-ideas provide details about the parent bubble. There are two ways to create sibling and parent bubble, but the minimum students will need to know is they are created by clicking one of the four grey clickable buttons that appear around the edge of each bubble.

The app opens to a white canvas with a single, colored bubble. Students type the topic of their paragraph into this bubble. Once the bubble is populated with text, the student will touch a blank area on the canvas to close the option to edit the text within bubble and the four grey clickable buttons will appear around the edge of the bubble: (a) the plus button creates a child bubble, (b) the T button allows a text comment to be made about the bubble, (c) the asterisk button creates a sibling bubble, and (d) the ellipse button opens another menu. Students do not need to know how to use the tasks within the ellipse button for the purposes of this use of Simple Mind Plus.

Each time a new bubble is created, connection lines are automatically drawn. To rearrange the connection lines, simple drag and drop the bubble into the bubble to which you wish to change the connection. More robust features of Simple Mind Plus include changing bubble and line colors, and adding pictures and video. These advanced features are not necessary to the basic use of Simple Mind Plus as a graphic organization tool. A help guide is available at http://www.simpleapps.eu/simplemind/touch/quickhelp.

Phraseology

Students will need to know three key features of Phraseology: (a) arrange mode, (b) inspect mode, and (c) highlighting. The arrange mode is accessed by clicking on the left sidebar icon that shows three small horizontal boxes. In this mode, Phraseology automatically places each sentence into its own cell which has a drag-and-drop button to the right. By holding down the drag-and-drop button complete sentences can easily be rearranged.

The inspect mode is accessed by clicking on the i icon also located on the left sidebar. In this mode, Phraseology gives data feedback to students including number of words and sentences, average length of each sentence, and readability level among other statistics. Teachers and students can predetermine target goals for each of these data points.

The highlight feature is enabled by clicking on the three concentric circles icon located on the left sidebar. By using the highlight feature, Phraseology highlights specific types of words in respective colors (e.g., nouns, adjectives, verbs). Students can be taught revision strategies based on each word type. A help guide is available at https://agiletortoise.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/200238829-Arrange-view.

Writer’s Diet Test

Students are not able to draft a paragraph in the Writer’s Diet Test. The paragraph must be drafted elsewhere and then copied and pasted into the Writer’s Diet canvass. Once pasted, students will click on the blue “Run the Test” button located directly above the canvas.

Students will need to know how to read a horizontal, color-coded bar graph to read their test results. Parts of speech are highlighted within their paragraph to a coordinated color on the bar graph. For example, verbs are orange on the bar graph and all verbs in the paragraph are also highlighted the same color orange. The Writer’s Diet rates the paragraph using a scale that is similar a range of body tones: lean, fit & trim, needs toning, flabby, and heart attack. The clearer the writing, the better overall rating will be. User information can be found at http://writersdiet.com/?page_id=16.

Hemmingway App

Like Phraseology and the Writer’s Diet Test, the Hemmingway app also opens up to a canvas for student’s writing. However, unlike the other apps, Hemmingway’s canvas is not blank; it has informational text describing the app itself. The text is highlighted in different colors, which are coordinated to the color-coded feedback on the right side of the canvas. Students will need to understand that the color schemes differ between Phraseology, the Writer’s Diet Test, and Hemmingway. Students can empty the Hemmingway app canvas by highlighting the entire text and selecting the delete key.

Students can then draft directly on the empty canvas or paste a paragraph that has been drafted elsewhere. Hemmingway highlights adverbs and passive voice. Students should be taught to reword sentences containing an adverb so that the verb in the sentence is more descriptive. Students should also be taught to reword passive voice sentences to the active voice. User information can be found at http://www.hemingwayapp.com/help.html.

Conclusion

Simple Mind Plus, Phraseology, Hemmingway, and the Writer’s Diet Test are four productivity tools that can help improve expository paragraph writing for students with LD. These apps support students by directing focus to higher-order writing skills and supporting working memory deficits. The apps can be combined in a step-by-step process to meet a variety of objectives. This process could further be adapted to other writing genres.

Footnotes

Author’s Note

The author has no affiliation or financial involvement with the commercial companies mentioned in this column.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Baker

Gersten

Graham

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

Boone

Higgins

(2015). Refocusing instructional design. In Edyburn

D. L.

(Ed.), Accessible instructional design (pp. 83–104). Bingley, UK: Emerald.

Dexter

Hughes

(2011). Graphic organizers and students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 51–72.

Englert

C. S.

Zhao

Dunsmore

Collings

Wolbers

(2007). Scaffolding the writing of students with disabilities through procedural facilitation: Using an Internet-based technology to improve performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 9–29.

Gilbert

Graham

(2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4 to 6: A national survey. Elementary School Journal, 110, 494–518. doi:10.1086/651193

Gillespie

Graham

(2014). A meta-analysis of writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 4, 454–473.

Graham

Harris

K. R.

(2009). Almost 30 years of writing research: Making sense of it all with The Wrath of Khan. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 58–68.

Graham

Harris

K. R.

(2013). Common Core State Standards, writing, and students with LD: Recommendations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28, 28–37. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12004

Graham

Harris

K. R.

(2016). A path to better writing. Reading Teacher, 69, 359–365. doi:10.1002/trtr.1432

10.

Graham

Harris

K. R.

Hebert

(2011). It is more than just the message: Analysis of presentation effects in scoring writing. Focus on Exceptional Children, 44(4), 1–12.

11.

Graham

Harris

K. R.

McKeown

(2013). The writing of students with learning disabilities, meta-analysis of self-regulated strategy development writing intervention studies, and future directions. In Swanson

H. L.

Harris

K. R.

Graham

(Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 405–438). New York, NY: Guilford.

12.

Graham

Harris

K. R.

Santangelo

(2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115, 498–522. doi:10.1086/681964

13.

Graham

McKeown

Kiuhara

Harris

K. R.

(2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879–896.

14.

Graham

Perin

(2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high school: A report to the Carnegie Corporation. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellence in Education.

15.

Greer

D. L.

Crutchfield

S. A.

Woods

K. L.

(2013). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning, Instructional design principles, and students with learning disabilities in computer-based and online learning environments. Journal of Education, 193(2), 1–48.

16.

Harris

K. R.

Graham

Mason

(2002). POW plus TREE equals powerful opinion essays. Teaching Exceptional Children, 14(4), 74–79.

17.

Hoover

(2013, March 4). Good grammar should be everyone’s business. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/03/good-grammar-should-be-everyon

18.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 (2004).

19.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Author.

20.

National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1990). Definition of learning disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.ldonline.org/pdfs/njcld/NJCLDDefinitionofLD.pdf

21.

Pearson . (2015, June). Pearson student mobile device survey—National report: Students in grades 4–12. Retrieved from http://www.pearsoned.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-Pearson-Student-Mobile-Device-Survey-Grades-4-12.pdf

22.

Peterson-Karlan

G. R.

(2015). Assistive technology instruction within a continuously evolving technology environment. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 16(2), 61–76.

23.

Straub

Alias

(2013). Next generation writing at the secondary level for students with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46, 16–24.

24.

Swanson

H. L.

Siegel

(2001). Learning disabilities as a working memory deficit. Issues in Education, 7, 1–48. doi:10.1177/002221940003300604

25.

Sword

(2015). The writer’s diet. Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland University Press.

26.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (2011). Writing 2011: National assessment of educational progress at grades 8 and 12 (Report No. NCE2 2012-470). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2011/2012470.pdf

27.

Vanderberg

Swanson

H. L.

(2007). Which components of working memory are important in the writing process? Reading & Writing, 20, 721–752. doi:10.1007/s11145-006-9046-6

28.

Wong

B. Y. L.

(1997). Research on genre-specific strategies for enhancing writing in adolescents with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 140–159. doi:10.2307/1511220