This study focuses on an examination of the learning-to-learn strategies of seventh-grade students as they highlight, take notes, plan, organize, and write expository texts. Participants consist of 125 students, 41 with disabilities and 84 without disabilities. The results reveal that the students with disabilities have more difficulties in using the learning-to-learn strategies as they read, study, and write expository texts, although neither group is judged to be highly proficient. The implications point to a renewed emphasis on preparing content-area teachers to teach the literacy and learning strategies that support the development of learners who know how to read to learn and how to write to learn.
Anderson, T.H., & Armbruster, B.B. (1984). Content area textbooks . In R. C. Anderson, Osborn, J., & Tierney, R. J (Eds.), Learning to read in American schools (pp. 193-226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
2.
Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Graham, S. (2003). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities: Research-based applications and examples. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 109-123.
3.
Baumann, J.F. (1984). The effectiveness of a direct instruction paradigm for teaching main idea comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly , 20, 93-115.
4.
Chan, L.K.S. (1991). Promoting strategy generalization through self-instructional training in students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 427-433.
5.
Day, J. (1986). Teaching summarization skills: Influences of students' ability level and strategy difficulty. Cognition and Instruction , 3, 193-210.
6.
Deshler, D.D., Ellis, E.S., & Lenz, B.K. (1996). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities: Strategies and methods. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
7.
DiCecco, V.M., & Gleason, M.M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 35, 306-320.
8.
Duke, N.K. (2000). For the rich it's richer: Print experiences and environments offered to children in very low- and very high-SES first grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 441-478.
9.
Englert, C., S., & Hiebert, E.H. (1984). Children's developing awareness of text structures in expository materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 65-75.
10.
Englert, C.S., Mariage, T.V., Okolo, C.M., Shankland, R.Moxley, K., Courtad, C.A. (2005). Rubrics for evaluating students' highlighting, notetaking, retelling, and composing expository texts. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Literacy Achievement Research Center.
11.
Englert, C.S., Raphael, T.E., Anderson, L.M., Anthony, H.M., Stevens, D.D., & Fear, K.L. (1991). Making writing strategies and self-talk visible: Cognitive strategy instruction in writing in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 337-372.
12.
Englert, C.S., & Thomas, C.C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students . Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 93-105.
13.
Flesch, R.F. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221-224.
14.
Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Elementary School Journal, 101, 251-272.
15.
Gersten, R., Fuchs, L.S., Williams, J.P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279-320.
16.
Graves, A.W. (1986). Effects of direct instruction and metacomprehension training on finding main ideas. Learning Disability Research , 1, 90-100.
17.
Jetton, T.L., & Alexander, P.A. (2004). Domains, teaching, and literacy. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 15-39). New York: Guilford.
18.
Kamberelis, G. (1999). Genre development: Children writing stories, science reports and poems. Research in the Teaching of English, 33, 403-460.
19.
Kamil, M.L. (2003). Adolescents and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
20.
Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004). Graphic organizers and their reading comprehension of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 105-118.
21.
Kincaid, J., Fishburn, J., Rogers, R., & Chissom, B. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas for Navy enlisted personnel (CNTECHTRA Research Branch Report). Millington, TN: Memphis Naval Air Station.
22.
Meyer, B.J.F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory . Amsterdam, the Netherlands: North-Holland .
23.
Meyer, B.J.F., Brandt, D.M., & Bluth, G.J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly , 16, 72-103.
24.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards and assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25.
Newell, G. (2006). Writing to learn: How alternative theories of school writing account for student performance. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 235-247). New York: Guilford .
26.
Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction , 1, 117-175.
27.
Shanahan, T. (2004). Overcoming the dominance of communication: Writing to think and to learn. In T. L. Jetton & J. A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 59-74). New York: Guilford.
28.
Stanford Achievement Test. (1996). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Educational Measurement.
29.
Taylor, B.M., & Beach, R.W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on middle-grade student's comprehension and production of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 134-146.
30.
Taylor, B.M., & Samuels, S.J. (1983). Children's use of text structure in the recall of expository material. American Educational Research Journal , 20, 517-528.
31.
Vaughn, S., Gersten, R., & Chard, D.J. (2000). The underlying message in LD intervention research: Findings from research syntheses. Exceptional Children, 67, 99-114.
32.
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler intelligence scale for children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
33.
Williams, J.P. (1984). Categorization, macrostructure, and finding the main idea. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 874-879.
34.
Williams, J.P. (1993). Comprehension of students with and without learning disabilities: Identification of narrative themes and idiosyncratic text representations . Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 631-641.
35.
Williams, J.P. (2003). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension . In H. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 293-305). New York: Guilford.
36.
Williams, J.P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary-grade students: A focus on text structure. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 6-18.
37.
Williams, J.P., Taylor, B.M., Jarin, D.C., & Milligan, E.S. (1983). Determining the main idea of expository paragraphs: An instructional program for the learning-disabled and its evaluation (Technical Report No. 25). New York: Columbia University, Teachers College.
38.
Wong, B.Y.L. (1979). Increasing retention of main ideas through questioning strategies. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 42-47.
39.
Wong, B.Y.L., & Jones, W. (1982). Increasing metacomprehension in learning disabled and normally achieving students through self-questioning training. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 409-414.
40.
Wong, B.Y.L., & Wilson, M. (1984). Investigating awareness of and teaching passage organization in learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228-238.
