MEETING COMMON CORE STANDARDS FOR ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING: A
CURRICULUM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Graduate and Professional Studies in Education
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
Education
(Special Education)
by
Malissa Ann Stotts
SPRING
2014
© 2014
Malissa Ann Stotts
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
MEETING COMMON CORE STANDARDS FOR ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING: A
CURRICULUM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES
A Project
by
Malissa Ann Stotts
Approved by:
_______________________________________, Committee Chair
Jean Gonsier-Gerdin, Ph.D.
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Malissa Ann Stotts
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format
manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for
the project.
__________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Albert Lozano, Ph.D.
Graduate and Professional Studies in Education
iv
___________________
Date
Abstract
of
MEETING COMMON CORE STANDARDS FOR ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING: A
CURRICULUM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES
by
Malissa Ann Stotts
High school students are lacking writing skills to be successful in post-secondary
education, and in the work force. At work, writing is a gateway for employment and promotion,
especially in salary positions. Those seeking employment in businesses as well as government
and state jobs must be able to create clearly written documents such as emails, messages,
memoranda, and technical reports. Writing also influences the participation in civic life and the
community at large.
In order to meet these post-secondary expectations for writing, new Common Core State
Standards are being implemented in 45 states, including California. Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) require high school students to write using evidence from primary and
secondary source texts across academic areas, rather than from prior experience. Potentially,
students with learning disabilities, especially those in their later years of high school, will be
impacted because they will not have had the writing exposure.
While the CCSS are already being implemented, no established curriculum has yet to be
published for teachers to use. Therefore, the purpose of this project was to develop and pilot test a
curriculum unit tailored specifically to meet the needs of students with learning disabilities and to
promote their success in argumentative writing. With this curriculum, teachers can teach multiple
v
lessons over a period of time to their students regarding effective argumentative writing.
Students can develop and learn to use valid reasoning to support their claim as well as to provide
relevant and sufficient evidence. The curriculum unit begins with an introduction and instructions
on how to write a measurable IEP goal aligned with the relevant CCSS and guidelines for the
implementation of explicit/direct instruction, UDL, scaffolding and other evidence-based
organizational strategies to teach students with learning disabilities. Next, nine unit lessons plans
offer strategies and materials to walk students through the step-by-step process of writing an
argumentative essay. Manipulatives, such as a foldable or graphic organizer, and collaboration
with peers are suggested to foster and strengthen writing skills. The curriculum unit was
implemented twice with nineteen high school freshmen with learning disabilities using two
separate writing prompts over a four-month period. Throughout the implementation of the
lessons, growth was measured using a four-point rubric and the majority of students demonstrated
progress toward meeting the CCSS standards for argumentative writing.
______________________________, Committee Chair
Jean Gonsier-Gerdin, Ph.D.
_______________________
Date
vi
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to my children who spent countless hours encouraging me
throughout its development and Dr. Gonsier-Gerdin who compassionately guided me
throughout the process.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the special education teachers at my school site who
supported me throughout my project and were so willing to share their knowledge
throughout the development of my project.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication .............................................................................................................................. vii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ viii
List of Figures ...........................................................................................................................xi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
Background of the Problem ......................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................. 6
Purpose of the Project ................................................................................................ . 9
Significance of the Project .................................................................................... .... 10
Limitations ................................................................................................................. 11
Definition of Terms ................................................................................................. . 12
Organization of the Project ........................................................................................ 17
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................................. 18
Concerns about Writing Abilities of High School Graduates ................................... 18
Challenges Experienced with Writing by Students with Disabilities ....................... 22
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Writing Expectations for Students ...... 25
Researched-Based Practices to Provide Access to Writing Curriculum ................... 27
Summary .................................................................................................................... 37
3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 39
Preparation for Project Development......................................................................... 39
Development of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum ......................................... 40
ix
Implementation of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum ...................................... 43
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT & RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 45
Description of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum ............................................ 45
Outcome of Implementation of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum ................. 49
Recommendation for Future Practice ....................................................................... 52
Recommendation for Future Research ...................................................................... 54
Appendix A. How to Support the Claim: An Argumentative Writing Unit ................. 55
References ............................................................................................................................. 110
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
1.
Page
Achievement Levels for NAEP Writing, 2011………………………………………. 2
xi
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem
One may ask themselves why it is so important to be able to write? Young adults
who do not learn to write well are at a considerable disadvantage, especially those with
disabilities. In school, students that do not learn how to write receive lower grades,
especially in classes where written tests and reports are the primary means for assessing
students’ progress (Graham, 2008). Those students that are lacking in writing skills are
less likely to use writing to support and extend what they are learning in content classes.
Graham (2008) found in his research that without writing skills a student’s opportunities
to attend college are significantly reduced because writing is used to evaluate applicants’
qualifications. Graham and Perin (2007) emphasized the importance of writing as a life
skill:
Writing well is not just an option for young people—it is a necessity. Along with
reading comprehension, writing skills are a predictor of academic success and a
basic requirement for participation in civic life and in the global economy. Yet
every year in the United States large numbers of adolescents graduate from high
school unable to write at the basic levels required by colleges or employers......
(p. 3).
Yet, writing continues to be one of the most difficult academic areas for student
with or without disabilities to master (Harris, Graham, MacArthur, Reid, & Mason,
2011). In fact, findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (National
2
Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012), a Congressionally authorized project by the
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), has demonstrated that a majority of
high school students with and without disabilities are not proficient in expected writing
skills (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012). The NAEP measures
elementary and secondary students' academic achievement in various subject areas and
communicates finding in the Nation's Report Card.
Figure 1
Achievement Levels for NAEP Writing, 2011
Achievement-Level Results
NAEP Writing, 2011.
12th Grade
Below Basic
Basic
Proficient
Advanced
8th Grade
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
According to the Nation’s Report Card, students in the United States have not met
the proficiency standards in writing overall in 8th or 12th grade as indicated in the chart
above (See Figure 1). Three percent of 8th graders and 12th graders performed at the
3
Advanced level (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012). Twenty-four
percent of students at both 8th and 12th grade performed at the Proficient level. Lastly, 54
percent of 8th and 52 percent of 12th graders performed at the Basic level in writing. The
NAEP assessment included all learners that were not predetermined through an
Individualized Education Plan (IEP) not to participate. Therefore, there were students
with and without disabilities among the sample. All students with disabilities were given
proper accommodations to meet their individual needs to successfully engage with the
assessment.
Clearly, the findings shared in the Nation's Report Card (National Assessment of
Educational Progress, 2012) indicate that students with and without disabilities need to
increase their writing skills for writing scores to reach proficiency. These findings were
among the factors that prompted the National Governors Association (NGA) and the
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to develop the Common Core State
Standards (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012). In order to raise the
expectations for student performance, the Common Core State Standards Initiative was
enacted. Currently, the implementation of the Common Core State Standards along with
clearly defined markers of what students should know and be able to do at each level of
their K–12 schooling is occurring in 45 states across the United States.
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were released as a draft form in 2009.
The standards have been established to prepare students for higher education and
ultimately, the workforce. There are three key factors that have driven the need for
change resulting in the new CCSS: a) the change in technology, b) global job market
4
competition, and c) the need for college and career readiness. In many schools across
American, the previous curriculum was based on the factory model (Horn & Evans,
2013). The primary goal of education was to prepare young people for factory jobs that
required them to repeatedly perform a relatively simple task. In turn, they were merely
required to comprehend and follow instructions (Common Core State Standards
Initiative, 2010). This design was focused for an Industrial Age education system to
prepare America for the future, and it was very successful. However, we are no longer
living in the Industrial Age; instead students are entering a world of technology and a
competitive global job market requiring a new kind of worker. These workers will have
jobs that utilize a higher level and more diverse set of skills. Students cannot just
consume information, but rather need to be able to produce, generate, and think creatively
and critically. They also need to reason effectively, solve complex problems, and
communicate clearly. In addition, the expectations include students being college and
career ready. The Common Core State Standards define being college and career ready as
the ability "to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing academic college courses and in
workforce-training programs" (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 1). The
Common Core State Standards provide a framework for teachers and parents to
understand what students are expected to learn in classrooms across the United States.
Consistent standards will provide appropriate benchmarks for all students, regardless of
where they live (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010).
With the implementation of the new Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in
California, all students including those with disabilities will have increased expectations
5
in English Language Arts (ELA) and content area literacy. The CCSS standards clearly
state reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language expectations for students to be
ready to succeed in college, workforce training programs, and careers (California
Department of Education, 2013). Both general education teachers and special education
teachers will need to be able to apply the standards across content areas, such as history,
science and other technical subjects. Students will need to be able to “cite specific textual
evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts, attending to important
distinctions the author makes and to any gaps or inconsistencies in the account"
(California Department of Education, 2013, p. 77).
With the application of CCSS, instructional time in English Language Arts classes
should be split among nonfiction and fiction. These standards require teachers to teach
students to write arguments through informative/explanatory texts (California Core State
Standards Initiative, 2010). This will allow a shift to increase informational reading,
focus on informational texts and increase the use of primary source documents (Straub &
Alias, 2013). The result will challenge the students in reading and writing by asking them
to critically analyze, evaluate, and differentiate primary and secondary sources. What
does this mean for states that are implementing CCSS? Content area teachers, ELA
teachers, and special education teachers will need to incorporate more writing into their
lessons so that all students, including those that have learning disabilities have increased
exposure to writing tasks (Straub & Alias, 2013). Students with learning disabilities often
have increased challenges when reading complex texts, thus each individual will need a
different level of support, not only by the general education teacher, but also by the
6
special education teacher. Special education teachers will also be required to teach high
school students, regardless of their disability, by the 12th grade to “introduce precise,
knowledgeable claim(s), establish the significance of the claim(s), distinguish the
claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that logically
sequences claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence" (CCSSI, 2010, p. 45) to meet
ELA standards.
Due to the increased complexity of the required tasks, special education teachers
will need to make accommodations and modifications across content areas so students
can meet the standards for argumentative writing. Specifically, Graham, Collins, and
Rigby-Willis (2013) suggested three strategies to create access for students with learning
disabilities to learn writing strategies: universal design for learning principles (supports
access to core curriculum), making accommodations (changing material and instructional
procedures), and using assistive technology. By using these strategies, the special
educator will be able to assist students with various abilities and challenges to access
required skills in order to reach the expectations of the Common Core State Standards.
Statement of the Problem
Many different issues relate to this project. First, according to Graham and Perin
(2007), high school students lack the writing skills to be successful in post-secondary
education. They also do not meet the requirements needed to succeed in trade school or
be successful in the workforce. Second, 45 states, including California, are applying the
Common Core State Standards allowing students, including those with disabilities, to
enhance their critical thinking skills and develop their writing capabilities across the
7
curriculum. Yet, there is no established curriculum to meet the Common Core State
Standards. Lastly, not every teacher uses Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in their
classroom. With the Common Core State Standards, it is vital that UDL supports be
incorporated within a teacher’s lesson to serve all students.
Writers that are struggling face considerable barriers in the “real” world (Graham,
2008). At work, writing is a gateway for employment and promotion, especially in salary
positions. Those seeking employment in businesses as well as government and state jobs
must be able to create clearly written documents, memoranda, technical reports, and
electronic messages (Graham, 2008). Writing also influences the participation in civic
life and the community at large. With the continuous change of technology, a person is
increasingly required to write through email and text messaging.
In order to meet these expectations for writing, the new Common Core State
Standards, require students to write using evidence from primary and secondary source
texts, rather than from prior experience. Potentially, students with disabilities, especially
those in their later years of high school, will be impacted because they have not been
required to do these tasks. Research has shown that high school students with learning
disabilities have been taught primarily to take multiple-choice tests and answer short
answer questions (Student Achievement Partners, 2012). As a result of the standards for
writing, curriculum needs to be developed to assist students in meeting these standards.
Curriculum that is aligned with Common Core State Standards will not be developed
until after the Fall of 2014. In the meantime, special education teachers will need to
develop writing units that meet the needs of each individual learner. With regard to
8
teaching argumentative writing, units will need to be developed using a variety of
documents, informative/explanatory texts and narratives that create a well-structured
sequence of events.
Moreover, with the increasing focus on schools to support all student to access
and learn general education curriculum, teachers will need to develop UDL into their
curriculum. Due to the benefits of UDL, there continues to be a growing awareness that
simply providing access to the general education curriculum is insufficient if students are
to achieve optimal learning (Boone & Higgins, 2007). There is an important distinction
between access to information and access to learning (Rose & Meyer, 2002). UDL is not
just for students with disabilities, it can be used with any population of students in
general. Just because a student can access a piece of content does not guarantee that the
student can understand or make sense of it. Access to content is inadequate unless it is
mediated with instructional designed supports that are appropriate for the specific
disability of the individual. Furthermore, instructional strategies that are suitable for a
student with a particular disability might not be appropriate for another student with a
different disability.
The current author is being called on to support general education teachers in their
efforts to serve diverse populations in their high school classrooms. It became very
evident that the curriculum and strategies for implementation of the Common Core State
Standards are vital. Although it is clear that the Common Core Standards and benchmark
skills will improve writing, there are many problems that can inhibit student success,
especially if the student has a learning disability. There are various ways that special
9
education teachers can support students with LD. First, teachers need to proactively plan
individual supports that will enhance student performance. Second, teachers need to
assess the student's understanding of the writing process and what key elements
contribute to the development of successful writing for that student. One very important
point is that teachers do not approach the CCSS writing standards with a one-size-fits-all
mentality. It is imperative that special education teachers and general education teachers
collaborate so goals can be differentiated for students who are writing below grade level.
This collaboration will allow students to make progress towards their IEP writing goals
and eventually meet grade level standards.
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this project is to create a unit of curriculum specifically used to
instruct students with learning disabilities on the necessary components to writing an
argumentative essay. This curriculum will incorporate UDL as well as additional
accommodations and instructional strategies to meet individual learning styles, will
include interactive lesson components, and incorporate nonfiction stories from texts,
online newspaper articles and other literary resources. The objectives of the lessons will
be to meet the Common Core Standards and the lessons can be utilized in any high school
setting that is trying to build argumentative essay writing skills. Resources such as
graphic organizers, customized templates, and interactive writing experiences will be
implemented so teachers can meet the rigors of CCSS. This unit will serve not only to
introduce students with learning disabilities to writing strategies, but also to increase their
writing skills for future employment opportunities. Lastly, this unit of curriculum will
10
allow teachers to find an access point for students to meet the CCSS and meet individual
IEP goals of the students.
To do so, the current author reviewed current Common Core Standards, what
curriculum other teachers are using to implement Common Core Standards, as well as
current research to ascertain what works when implementing positive writing skills for all
students. The author also collaborated with general education teachers and special
education teachers at a rural high school in Northern California to design the curriculum
to meet all students’ needs. This research and collaboration was intended to help the
development of a writing unit that will meet the Common Core Standards and enhance all
students writing abilities for future employment or schooling.
This project will encourage collaboration between general education teachers and
special education teachers and include all students with learning disabilities into the
general education classroom. With more schools moving towards inclusive education and
the co-teaching model (Graham, 2008), all students will be educated in an inclusive
setting. Therefore, it is essential to provide curriculum for teachers to use with all
students that successfully incorporate researched based writing strategies.
Significance of the Project
The project was developed to teach students with learning disabilities the writing
process in order to successfully draft an argumentative essay. The project contains many
strategies in UDL and those to promote executive functioning skills (i.e. organizing,
planning, sequencing, etc.). The project also contains lessons that explicitly teach
students the step-by-step writing process of an argumentative essay. Within this project,
11
there are many creative ideas for scaffolding that can be tailored for individual learners.
The overarching goal of this project is for students to achieve longer, more complete, and
quality written argumentative essays.
This project will benefit teachers in one Northern California high school by
introducing curriculum that addresses the needs of students in their classrooms. This
curriculum will be used to benefit all students at the school, not just those students who
have an individual education plan (IEP). This project will be disseminated to other staff
members at this school who serve students with disabilities so they may use to teach
argumentative essay writing skills. Ultimately, the current author plans to make the
curriculum available to other schools within the local high school district and the local
elementary school district. To that end, the curriculum could be shared during
professional development opportunities with the current author providing technical
assistance as necessary.
Limitations
One limitation of the project is that the development and implementation of the
curriculum only focused on 63 freshman students with learning disabilities at one small
rural school that encompasses four RSP classrooms teaching four grade levels of
language arts. Another limitation of the project is that the writing unit was developed, but
not set in place for an extended period of time (i.e. less than four months). Further field
testing will need to be done to determine what additions and edits will be needed to
obtain successful outcomes for students. Furthermore, the curriculum is written for
12
current standards; therefore, the curriculum will need to be revised when changes to the
standards are made.
Definition of Terms
Accommodations
Accommodations are practices and procedures that address the areas of
presentation, response, setting, and timing/scheduling to provide equitable access during
instruction and assessments for students with disabilities (Thompson, Morse, Sharpe, &
Hall, 2005).
Annual Goals
Statements of annual academic and functional goals are measureable and designed
to meet a student’s needs that results from his/her disability so the student can be
involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum. Annual goals also
should meet each of the student’s other educational needs that result from his/her
disability (National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities, 2014). Annual
goals explain what the student will be working on academically throughout the year. All
goals include who will achieve the goal, what skill or behavior is being achieved, what
criteria for mastery, in what setting, under what conditions as well as when the goal
should be achieved (National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities, 2014).
At the Advanced Level in Writing
Students at this level are able to address the tasks strategically, fully accomplish
their communicative purposes, and demonstrate a skillful, creative approach to
constructing and delivering their messages. Texts are coherent and well structured, and
13
create connections and transitions that are rhetorically powerful. All of the ideas should
be clear, logical, and effective. Supporting details and examples skillfully support and
extend main ideas. Texts should include a variety of sentence structures and types.
Spelling, grammar, usage, capitalization, and punctuation should be evident throughout
the texts (National Assessment of Educational Progress, 2012).
At the Basic Level in Writing
Students performing at this level are able to analyze texts that are coherent and
well structured. Most ideas are developed effectively in their text. Relevant details and
examples are used to support and extend the main ideas. Texts include varied, simple,
compound, and complex sentences as well as words and phrases that are suitable for the
topics, purposes, and audiences. Considerable knowledge of spelling, grammar,
capitalization, and punctuation should be evident. There can be some errors in the texts,
but these errors cannot impede meaning (National Assessment of Educational Progress,
2012).
At the Proficient Level in Writing
Students at this level are able to structure their writings to be coherent and wellstructured with effective connections and transitions. Their ideas are developed in a
logical, clear, and effective manner. Details and examples should support and extend the
main ideas of the texts. Texts should include a variety of simple, compound, and complex
sentence types. Words and phrases are purposeful and skillfully enhance the effectiveness
of the texts as well as demonstrate a solid knowledge of spelling, grammar, usage,
14
capitalization, and punctuation throughout the texts (National Assessment of Educational
Progress, 2012).
Curriculum
A curriculum includes lessons of academic content that are taught in a school or
in a specific course. Curriculum refers to the knowledge and skills the students are
expected to learn. These lessons contain learning standards/objectives that the student is
expected to meet. Many curricula contain units and lessons, assignments, projects,
videos, presentations, readings and assessments. Curricula may be purchased from
individual teachers as well as publishers. Curriculum can also be developed by teachers,
refined, and improved throughout their years of teaching (Honigsfeld & Dove, 2013).
Individual Education Plan
This plan is a legally binding document that details the special education services
a child will receive. It includes classification, services, and academic and behavior goals
(IDEA, 2004). Individual Education Plans, or IEPs, are used in the classroom setting as
an academic plan for students with disabilities. The IEP can be referenced by all teachers
who are involved in the learning process. This plan is written by an IEP team which may
consists of the parents, the student, special education teacher, general education teachers,
school nurse, administration and any other representatives from an agency that works
directly with the child. All of the information is compiled and used to write goals and
services for individual students allowing equal access to the curriculum (National
Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities, 2014).
15
Learning Disabilities
A learning disability is a neurological condition that interferes with an
individual’s ability to store, process, or produce information. Learning disabilities can
affect one’s ability to read, write, speak, spell, compute math, reason. It can also interfere
with the individual’s attention, memory, coordination, social skills and emotional
maturity (Nation Center for Learning Disabilities, 2014a).
Least Restrictive Environment
Least restrictive environment is a school setting that is the least restrictive to meet
the students individual needs while delivering a high quality education. Children with
disabilities, regardless of where they are being educated, are to be educated with children
who are not disabled. Special day classes, separate schooling, or other removal of
children with disabilities from the regular educational environment should only occur
when the nature or severity of the disability and the use of supplementary aids and
services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (U.S. Department of Education, 2014).
Modifications
Modifications address changes in course, standard, test preparation, location,
timing, scheduling, expectation, student response, or other attribute that provides access
for a student with a disability to participate, but alters or lowers the standards or
expectations (Thompson, et al., 2005).
Services
Services encompass IDEA’s full requirement for a child’s related services in his
or her IEP. IDEA stipulates that each student’s IEP must contain: a statement of the
16
special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, to be
provided to the student, or on behalf of the student. The IEP must state program
modifications or supports by school personnel that will are provided to enable the student
to have access. There must be clear markers to measure whether the students is advancing
toward attaining the annual goals. The student must also make progress in the general
education curriculum and participate in extracurricular and nonacademic activities. The
students must also be educated in the least restrictive environment and participate with
other children with disabilities and nondisabled children (National Dissemination Center
for Children with Disabilities, 2014).
Related services help children with disabilities benefit from their special
education by providing extra help and support in needed areas, such as speaking or
moving. Related services might include any of the following: speech-language pathology
and audiology services, interpreting services, psychological services, physical and
occupational therapy, recreation, including therapeutic recreation, early identification and
assessment of disabilities in children. Other services available are: counseling services,
including rehabilitation counseling, orientation and mobility services, medical services
for diagnostic or evaluation purposes, school health services and school nurse services,
social work services in schools, and parent counseling and training (National
Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities, 2014).
Universal Design for Learning
Universal Design for Learning is a set of principles for curriculum development
that gives all individuals equal access and opportunities to learn. UDL provides a
17
blueprint for creating instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments that work
for everyone. It is not a single, one-size-fits-all solution, but rather a flexible approach
that can be customized and adjusted for individual needs (Center for Applied Special
Technology, 2011).
Organization of the Project
Chapter 1 introduces the project and its importance. Specifically, the introduction
includes the background of the problem, statement of the problem, purpose of the project,
limitations of the project, definition of terms, and an overview of the project. Chapter 2
provides a review of the literature, with specific focus on: concerns about writing abilities
of high school students; challenges experienced with writing by student with disabilities;
the Common Core State Standards and writing expectations for students; and researchbased practices to improve student writing, which include Universal Design for Learning
(UDL), scaffolding, and explicit instruction. Chapter 3 delineates how the current author
incorporated current research-based writing practices to design, implement and pilot test
the curriculum to teach students with learning disabilities argumentative writing skills
that meet the CCSS. Chapter 4 describes the project in detail and how it has been
implemented. In addition, recommendations for practice and future research are
presented. The appendix includes the curriculum, How to Support the Claim: An
Argumentative Writing Unit, with the templates, outlines, and resources charts for
accommodations for students with learning disabilities.
18
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This review of literature first focuses on the current research associated with
concerns about high school graduates’ abilities to meet writing expectations post-high
school graduation. Writing skills are critical for students to transition successfully into
the workforce and into post-secondary education. This literature review also presents the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and the expectations in writing, the particular
challenges that students with learning disabilities experience with writing in high school,
and the research-based practices that promote access to the curriculum and proficiency in
writing abilities, including Universal Design for Learning (UDL), scaffolding, explicit
instruction and other research based strategies.
Concerns about Writing Abilities of High School Graduates
Since the 20th century, writing scores of high school students have been analyzed.
This analysis has determined that students have made little growth in achieving
proficiency in writing over the past century (Graham, 2008). In fact, many employers,
universities, and trade schools have reported that students entering the work force and
post-secondary school are unprepared to write at the caliber required. For example,
students entering post-secondary schools are assessed to ascertain if they need
remediation in writing prior to taking college level courses and it has been found that the
remediation rates are high (Graham, 2008). Entering college freshmen who are not
proficient in English are required to start the remediation process before their first regular
19
term. The goal is to prepare these students for college and improve the students’ chances
of successfully completing a college degree.
Findings by Hart (2005) highlighted that high school students are unprepared after
graduation. In this study, 861 students enrolled in two- and four-year colleges and 626
public high school graduates not currently enrolled in college, were interviewed. This
sample included 267 students who had been enrolled in college, but had withdrawn; 303
African Americans and 287 Hispanics; and 353 current college students who were
required to take a remedial writing course. Four hundred employers, including owners,
CEOs, presidents, and human resource professionals, who make work force decisions
also were interviewed, Lastly, 300 instructors who teach first-year students at two- and
four-year colleges were interviewed. According to the findings of this study (Hart, 2005),
public high schools are adequately preparing some graduates (61% of participants), but
not all graduates for the writing demands after graduation. Specifically, the students
claimed that the overall skills, abilities, and work habits expected of them were not
cultivated by their high school education and they were therefore unprepared for
employment and higher education.
Many of the college instructors and employers in Hart’s study (2005) confirmed
the self-assessments of the high school graduates. College instructors agreed that recent
high school graduates were inadequately prepared to meet college expectations, leading
to high rates of remediation and taking more years to graduate. According to the college
instructors interviewed, they spend a significant amount of time teaching writing skills
that should have been learned prior to entering college. Forty-one percent of the students
20
enrolled at two-year colleges and 37% of students enrolled at four-year colleges reported
that they have gaps in their preparation. The majority of self-identified, part-time students
(53%) reported that they have gaps in preparation to meet the expectation of the work
force (Hart, 2005). From this research, it is clear that many students may not only be
unprepared for the work force, but also be at risk of facing challenges in college.
Graham (2008) wanted to discover the writing skills that were and were not
receiving attention in public K-12 education across the United States. He found that the
most common writing activities in high school include responding with short answers on
homework, responding to material read, completing worksheets, journal entries,
summarizing material read, and making lists. These activities involve little prolonged
analysis interpretation and in fact little writing. Over half of the most common
assignments examined by Graham (2008) involved writing without any composing (e.g.
short answers, worksheets, and lists). Furthermore, in a national survey of 2,000 writing
assignments, Melzer (2009) discovered that only 17% of the assignments involved
writing for argumentative purposes.
Graham (2008) also stated that many high school teachers, both English and other
content area teachers, believe their skills are inadequate to teach writing and that they
lack the appropriate preparation. The teachers who felt prepared were more likely to use
writing practices that are research-based and were able to adjust instruction to meet the
needs of struggling writers (Graham, 2008).
In 2002, the National Assessment of Education Progress Writing report card
found that only 31% of twelfth-graders in 2002 wrote argumentative essays that were
21
considered to meet standards or better. The assessment asked students to form a moral or
ethical point using nonfiction text that included a letter to an editor or Congressional
representative using pertinent facts or information. The argumentative essay needed a
claim, supporting evidence for the claim, a counterclaim, and a concluding statement.
The 31% of students who met standards used integrated forms of presentation. The 12th
graders that were not proficient lacked integrated forms of presentation, clear transitions
among arguments and did not incorporate a rebuttal to their argumentative essay (NAEP,
2002).
More recently, Newell, Beach, Smith, VanDerHeide, Kuhn, and Andriessen
(2011) studied students' perceptions of the purposes of writing assignments as well as the
audiences for argumentative writing assignments by reviewing 54 studies that included
students from K-12th grade. Their findings revealed that although students may be asked
to convince peers or outside audiences of the validity of their claims, students also know
that their primary audience is their teacher, especially if their performances are evaluated.
Unfortunately, with the teacher being the primary audience, students lose motivation and
consider the argumentative writing assignment just another task (Newell et al., 2011). In
short, students tend to write what they feel their teacher will want to read rather than
writing an argument that reflects their ideas and beliefs. The review by Newell et al.
(2011) showed that students have significant weaknesses in recognizing and applying
argumentative text structures as well as providing evidence for their claim, relevant
reasons for the argument, and counterarguments to their claim. The authors found that
less than 10% of students across the empirical studies reviewed could make critical
22
judgments about written text and 15% of the students were able to write a well-organized
essay that clearly stated their position, using transitions to lead the reader from one
reason to the another (Newell et al., 2011).
Challenges Experienced with Writing by Students with Disabilities
As discussed in the previous section, current research reflects that high school
students are not prepared for the post-graduation expectations for writing (Graham, 2008;
NAEP, 2012; Newell, Beach, Smith, VanDerHeide, Kuhn, & Andriessen, 2011). Not
surprisingly, researchers also have found that students with learning disabilities (LD)
write at lower levels of performance than typically developing students. Students with
LD use writing conventions such as spelling, writing, grammar and ideation less
effectively than the typical achieving student (Graham, Collins, & Rigby-Wills, 2013).
Many students with LD are missing critical components needed to meet the standards
when writing argumentative essays. Without these critical components, the
persuasiveness of the essay is lost (Graham, Collins, & Rigby-Wills, 2013).
In addition, students with LD face many challenges when understanding and
producing written language. Writing requires a complex set of motor skills, as well as
informational processing skills (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2014;
National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2014b). As student’s process information, they
gradually build a capacity to retain that information allowing them to gain knowledge and
skills (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2014; National Center for Learning
Disabilities, 2014b). As students learn new information, they then retrieve that prior
knowledge to complete the task being asked of them. Often students with LD are not able
23
to retrieve that prior knowledge to complete processing skills and they may have
challenges with motor skills necessary to be successful. Consequently, students with LD
may exhibit the following: handwriting that is hard to read, inconsistent spacing, poor
spatial planning on paper, and difficulty pre-visualizing letter formation. Other writingdeficits include: writing is slow or labored, words or letters are unfinished, words are
omitted, spelling is poor, and difficulty composing writing as well as thinking and writing
at the same time (Learning Disabilities Association of America, 2014; National Center
for Learning Disabilities, 2014b).
The article by Bulgren, Sampson-Graner, and Deshler (2013), reviewed the
challenges and opportunities for students with LD to meet the CCSS, as well as the
challenges educators are facing to assure success for students with LD. Challenges
addressed in the article include the higher order reasoning skills that are required to meet
the CCSS for literacy across content areas, such as history, science, etc. Bulgren et al.
(2013) reviewed the most important aspects of cognitive development during the teenage
years, which is problem solving. Problem solving requires increased proficiency in
specific information-processing skills, cognitive learning strategies, and metacognitive
skills. Many students with LD do not master these lower order-processing skills in their
younger years, which in turn, contribute to problems later in high school with higher
order processing skills (Bulgren et al., 2013). In fact, higher order reasoning skills such as
problem solving are extremely challenging for students with LD. In their work, DiCecco
and Gleason (2002) stated that students with LD may not have the skills to process and
organize information, make inferences, understand relationships, and distinguish main
24
ideas from details. Consequently, even more problems may occur for high school
students with LD due to the higher order demands across content areas. As a result, it
becomes a challenge to prepare these students to respond to the demands of the writing
curriculum in high school.
Straub and Alias (2013) analyzed the challenges that students with LD have to
keep up with the academic demands placed on them. These challenges include difficulties
from lower order mechanical problems, such as handwriting and typing, to higher order
cognitive and metacognitive problems such as using writing strategies that encompass
graphic organizers or calendars to complete the writing task (Straub & Alias, 2013). The
authors also found that students with LD typically spend less than 1 minute planning their
essay, therefore, missing the entire preplanning phase of writing. Lastly, students with
LD may be overconfident with their writing skills, which can lead to frustration when
scores do not match the student’s expectations (Straub & Alias, 2013).
Finally, students with LD often lack the motivation to engage in learning
continuously, which can affect overall achievement (Biancarosa & Snow, 2006; Guthrie
& Wigfield, 1997; Snow, Porche, Tabors, & Harris, 2007). These students’ motivation
can be stifled because of repeated failure and disappointment. Students with LD may feel
ostracized in the learning process and frequently choose to disengage (Bulgren et al.,
2013). Teachers should get to know their students with LD, and find a way to measure
student motivation. Motivation to learn is an important element in designing an effective
learning experience for students with LD to be successful in the high school setting.
25
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Writing Expectations for Students
The above-mentioned concerns about the writing abilities of high school
graduates, including those with learning disabilities, are among the factors that lead to the
development and implementation of the CCSS. The hope is to standardize what all
students should know, regardless of where they are residing, to meet the needs of future
employment and education. The promise of CCSS in elementary and secondary schools
is to teach students deeper critical thinking skills across the curriculum to meet the
demands of the new job market.
With the adoption of CCSS and the change in curriculum, educators must provide
the following to all students in the least restrictive environment: strategies to access the
curriculum, activities to promote engagement, and the use of technology (Straub & Alias,
2013). With the implementation of the new writing CCSS, all students, including students
with learning disabilities, will be expected to perform at a proficient level in English
Language Arts (ELA). Both general and special education teachers need to be aware that
these standards apply not only to English, but across all content area subjects - social
studies, science, math, etc. The shift in teaching reading, writing, speaking, listening
skills, and language across curriculum content in response to CCSS is intended to create a
shared responsibility across all content areas (Straub & Alias, 2013). High school
teachers will increase the amount of time spent on informational reading as well. With
CCSS, all students will be required to "analyze, evaluate, and differentiate primary and
secondary sources" and "gain knowledge from challenging text" (CCSSI, 2010, p. 60).
26
Teachers will require all students to read informational text and then take the information
they gathered and write argumentative essays to support their claims.
Straub and Alias (2013) also recommended that educators need to be teaching the
new Smarter Balance assessment process, which requires students take all state
assessments on computers to measure whether they have met the CCSS standards.
Teachers will need to teach students how to preset functions on the computer at the
beginning of the assessment. For example, students will be required to know how to
increase the size of the text or even to implement the text-to-speech option. Also, teachers
should instruct students on how to use the tools within the assessment, such as spell
check, calculator, thesaurus, etc.
More than 6 million children with disabilities receive special education and
related services throughout United States public schools each year (Aud et al., 2013). To
serve these students in the least restrictive environment and to provide access to general
education curriculum and settings, scaffolds need to be implemented within the
curriculum to meet the individualized needs of each student, in order for the student to
reach appropriate standards. For students with LD, their IEP goals need to be aligned to
the appropriate grade level standards. In order for students with LD to achieve their
CCSS aligned IEP goals, teachers must be highly qualified to deliver content area
instruction including writing and accomplish the goals set in the IEP. Graham et al.
(2013) asserted that instruction, individualized goals, and well-prepared general and
special education teachers were essential if students with LD were to meet CCSS
benchmarks in writing.
27
Research-Based Practices to Provide Access to Writing Curriculum
The developers of CCSS understand that for students with disabilities to achieve
proficiency, effective implementation of research-based instructional strategies will need
to be put into place (CCSS, 2013). In the literature, the following instructional strategies
were found to improve writing quality across multiple contexts: Universal Design for
Learning, explicit/direct instruction, and scaffolding curriculum to meet individual
learners needs (CCSS, 2013; Graham & Harris, 2013; Straub & Alias, 2013). With
evidence-based practices, the hope is the playing field will be leveled in part to give extra
assistance to students with LD, allowing them the opportunity to meet the CCSS writing
benchmarks.
UDL Curriculum in the Classroom
Researchers at Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST, 2011) define
Universal Design for Learning (UDL):
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework for designing curricula that
will enable all individuals to gain knowledge, skills, and enthusiasm for learning.
UDL provides rich supports for learning and reduces barriers to the curriculum
while maintain high achievement standards for all (Center for Applied Special
Technology, 2011).
There are three essential features of UDL curriculum: multiple means of representation,
expression and engagement.
Multiple means of representation. For academic content to be accessible to a
broad range of learners, it needs to be available in multiple, flexible formats. Optional
28
materials include digital books, text-to-speech, magnification, digital magnification,
electronic brail, differentiated levels, language translation, web links to background
content, sign language interpretation, word definitions and other alternative formats
(Wehmeyer, 2006).
Multiple means of expression. Multiple means of expression allow students
varied and flexible opportunities to demonstrate what they truly know. Individual learners
vary significantly in how they acquire and demonstrate understanding. Students need to
be allowed opportunities to practice supports, receive feedback, and need multiple
opportunities to demonstrate their skills through artwork, music, photography, video, etc.
in their work samples (Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose & Jackson, 2002; Rose & Meyer, 2002;
Wehmeyer, 2006). When teachers are able to attain a “true” picture of students’ skills,
they are better able to identify goals and formulate individualized plans.
Multiple means of engagement. The enhancement of student motivation to
participate and engage in the curriculum is essential for learning. Multiple means of
engagement incorporates student preferences and interests in the learning process. With
these priorities in place, instruction promotes positive emotion and fuels active learning,
as well as engagement. Research done at the Center for Applied Special Technology
(CAST) found that the use of digital presentation incorporating graphics and multi-media
components, such as video or audio, enhances student engagement (CAST, 2011). When
educators apply the principles of UDL in their classrooms, participation and engagement
increase allowing learning and academic progress within the curriculum (CAST, 2011).
29
UDL is pertinent to classrooms because it allows access to core curriculum and
resolves the time consuming issue of needing to retrofit general curriculum to allow
access and progress to all learners (Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose & Jackson, 2002). Flexible
curriculum allows educators the opportunity to incorporate differentiated instructional
methodologies, thematic units, community based-learning, cooperative learning, Multiple
Intelligences and activity-centered learning, all of which promote multiple pathways to
academic growth (Council for Exceptional Children, 2005; Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose &
Jackson, 2002). UDL also focuses on the use of technology that allows flexible
curriculum and promotes learning.
UDL is the creation of differentiated learning experiences that minimize
modifications for particular circumstances or individuals. UDL allows curriculum,
materials, and school environments to be usable for students from different backgrounds
and with different learning needs. The implementation of UDL can decrease segregation
of students based on performance levels or perceived abilities (Villa, Thousand, Liston &
Nevin, 2005). UDL in a classroom allows curriculum to be accessible and engaging while
reducing barriers in writing. In particular, UDL allows students with LD to make choices
that will sustain engagement, effort, persistence, and self-regulation in writing. Villa et
al., (2005) stated that when educators incorporate UDL, there may be increased
collaboration between general education and special education teachers to meet all
students’ needs in writing.
Michael and Trezek (2006) highlighted the importance of UDL and differentiating
the acquisition of complex content by using broad learning systems, approaches and
30
styles. These authors shared that differentiating curriculum can be cumbersome for
individual teachers, but planning curriculum with colleagues can lead to a variety of
options within each lesson for students to access complex content in multidimensional
ways. Also highlighted by Michael and Trezek (2006) is that secondary level cooperative
and authentic projects that are inquiry-based can connect curriculum from different
disciplines and facilitate students meeting the CCSS.
Scaffolding Strategies
Scaffolding is a flexible teaching strategy and refers to supports that teachers
build into their lessons. Scaffolding bridges between the distance of what students can do
independently and the next level of learning that student can achieve with assistance. The
scaffolds facilitate one’s ability to build on prior knowledge and then analyze new
information. Scaffolds allow students to complete a task that they would not be able to
complete without the scaffold. Scaffolds are temporary, so when the students master the
concept, the scaffolds are removed (Honigsfeld & Dove, 2013).
A study by Englert, Wu and Zhao (2005) explored the implementation and
evaluation of web based technology to support students with LD in writing performance.
The study was implemented in a resource room that involved 12 students in the upper
elementary grades. The students were asked to provide descriptive or expository
information in detail about a newsworthy event. Students were expected to offer
informational details and relevant ideas that provided content details about their
experiences or the event. The teacher had frontloaded with lessons that were interactive
to support the implementation of the writing tasks at hand prior to the study. The teacher
31
also guided students in organizational strategies that they could apply in writing their
informational texts. The students were prompted to monitor and reread their text in order
to produce a well-written, informative and interesting news story. The findings from this
study suggest that computer supported lessons could mediate and scaffold student
performance. By using writing tools and text structure strategies during construction of
their essays, students were able to incorporate properties that represent well-organized
texts. Other evidence suggests that students took advantage of task-specific hints that
were in the software. Students were accessing the spell checker, text-to-speech tools to
support metacognitive and self-monitoring tasks. The researchers found that with the use
of embedded tools (i.e., scaffolds) students who do not typically do well on traditional
paper and pencil writing assessments, did very well writing in this study (Englert et al.,
2005).
Furthermore, Lin, Hsu, Lin, Changlai, Yang and Lai (2011) analyzed 43 articles
that reported on empirical studies published in the area of science education. This study
revealed that the design, application and management of scaffolding strategies are
essential components of pedagogy. The authors in this study found that scaffolds support
conceptual understanding and procedural and strategic skills as well as metacognition and
epistemology. They also discovered that many of the studies used multiple means of
representation including written prompts, visualization, and social interaction among
peers. Finally, the authors (Lin et al., 2011) noted that scaffolds may help learners make
connections between new material being learned and what they already know.
32
More recently, Chowning, Griswold, Kovarik, and Collins (2012) analyzed
whether training, curriculum, and scaffolding strategies had an overall effect on student
performance in argumentative writing. They also researched the ability of the high school
students to process bioethical case studies and develop a strong position. Four hundred
thirty-one students and 12 teachers participated in the research study. Specifically, the
teachers were looking to foster critical thinking skills using bioethical case studies,
decision-making frameworks, and analytically structured tools to scaffold student
arguments. The first group of teachers received professional development in curriculum
and scaffold teaching strategies; the second group did not. The first group of educators
who had received the professional development were able to show from the students’
work that the students had made significant gains in knowledge of content, the ability to
analyze socio-scientific issues, awareness of ethical issues, the ability to listen and
discuss different viewpoints from their own, and understanding the relationship between
science and society. Overall, scaffolding strategies not only helped increase students’
abilities, but also promoted students’ motivation and engagement with the content while
promoting reasoning and justification skills (Chowning, et al., 2012).
Michael and Trezek (2006) analyzed the writing difficulties among students with
LD who were accessing the general education curriculum and instruction for the majority
of their day in general education classrooms. These authors stated that these students
needed support to access the core curriculum and scaffolds should be one component to
assisting them in doing so. They suggested the teachers build into their lessons
multidimensional scaffolding tools, including visual organizational maps calendars,
33
planners, notebook organization, and clarifying questions. Similarly, Graham et al.
(2011) found the following scaffolds to promote successful writing for students with LD:
making accommodations (changes to material and instructional procedures), and using
assistive technology such as text-to-speech, touch equivalents, etc. With individualized
scaffolding strategies, students are more likely to attain their full potential and experience
educational success in within their academic setting.
Explicit Instruction
Explicit instruction is a systematic instructional approach that includes delivery
and design procedures. This research based instruction guides students through the
learning process and provides the student with clear statements about the purpose and
rationale for learning the new skill. The teacher also gives clear explanations and
demonstrations of the instructional target and supports the student with practice and
feedback until mastery has been achieved. Explicit instruction has been available since
the 1960’s. Substantial research has been conducted in the area of explicit instruction and
the outcome of effective teaching practices in writing. The research shows that when
using all of the components of explicit instruction, better student writing outcomes will
be achieved (Adams & Engleman, 1996; Hall, 2002). There are two essential components
to well-designed explicit instruction in writing; 1) visible delivery in instruction with a
high level of teacher and student interactions; and 2) instructional design principles that
make up the content and strategies being taught in writing (Hall, 2002). Instructional
delivery includes background knowledge, frequent student response, appropriate
34
instructional pace, adequate processing time, monitored responses, and to provide
feedback for correct and incorrect responses.
In a study done by Moss and Bordelon (2007), instructional teaching practices of
three high school teacher were investigated to measure the successfulness of a new
rhetoric and writing course. The study examined qualitatively the practices related to a
yearlong course, the teachers’ perceptions of success and the challenges of applying the
curriculum, the impact of the curriculum on the teachers/students, and lastly, the effects
of direct instruction. Involved in the study were three teachers who taught 230 students
on a daily basis. The authors found that the curriculum emphasized effective instruction
that incorporated modeling and scaffolding as well as professional development in
writing. In particular, all three teachers had the philosophy that all students can learn and
it was their job to make that connection between what students knew and what students
needed to know. In order to make this connection, students were given work in smaller
amounts to process and group work, and the teachers always modeled tasks before asking
the student to do it. The authors (Moss & Bordelon, 2007) noted that the critical
component of the teaching practice in this case study was direct instruction that
incorporated the regular use of modeling. They also found that the writing program had
promising results and potential for improving college readiness with the emphases in
direct instruction in writing.
In another study, Monte-Sano (2008) explored the practices of two high school
teachers and their students’ performance on writing evidence-based essays in history. The
data included pre- and post-assessments as well as interviews, observations and feedback
35
on the written assignments. There were qualitative and quantitative comparisons of the 84
students work. Monte-Sano found that the 42 students who had been taught with direct
instruction, guided practice and feedback did qualitatively better than the 42 students that
did not have direction instruction. With these direct instruction techniques, students were
able to develop their own interpretations of history and were better able to support those
ideas with evidence.
With regard to teaching writing to learners with disabilities, Wallace and Bott
(1989) investigated the effects of teaching metacognitive paragraph writing skills to
eighth-grade students with learning disabilities. In this study, four students were taught
through direct instruction to use an outline as a paragraph planning guide and then to
convert the information into a written expository paragraphs. All of the students reached
mastery when writing a compare and contrast essay as well as sequencing. The study
found that with direction instruction of paragraph writing including the Statement-Pie,
outlines, students with disabilities were able improve their scores from 72% and below to
100% (Wallace & Bott, 1989).
Finally, Walker, Shippen, Houchins and Cihak (2007) utilized a multiple probe
design to study the effects of direct instruction in expressive writing programs for
students with learning disabilities at the high school level. There were three freshman
students participating in this study. The participants were members of three different
small instructional study skills classes. Each participant was instructed to write
paragraphs with a topic sentence, supporting details, and a conclusion. All three high
school students who participated in the study showed academic gains with instruction
36
through the direct instruction of the writing program. The results of this study have
implications for classroom instructional practices and contribute to teaching writing skills
to students with LD using direct instruction (Walker et al., 2007).
Other Research-Based Strategies to Teach Writing
Macarthur and Philippakos (2013) researched the development of writing
curriculum for first year college students. Over a period of two semesters, the writing
curriculum was implemented in eight classes taught by three instructors. After reviewing
the analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, a revision of the curriculum was made
and taught over the second semester. In the curriculum, students were taught strategies
for planning, drafting, and revising compositions. The curriculum also placed an
emphasis on text organization to guide planning and self-evaluation. In addition to
specific writing strategies, students learned strategies for self-regulation, which allowed
them to complete the writing task. Macarthur and Philippakos (2013) found that the
curriculum produced good outcomes for writing quality and motivation. Writing
outcomes for the second semester were more positive than those from the first, and the
overall quality of writing and use of conventions improved. Specifically, students in the
second semester averaged a 2 point gain in quality of their writing on a 7-point scale.
Although the curriculum did not include any grammar instruction other than editing
support embedded with writing, students also made large gains in conventions in their
writing.
In another study, Kiuhura, O’Neill, Hawken, and Graham (2012) utilized a
multiple baseline design to investigate the effectiveness of instruction on planning and
37
drafting persuasive writing for high school students with disabilities who were also
struggling writers. In this study, the writing of the six 10th grade students with learning
disabilities was measured using multiple probes during baseline, treatment, and post
instruction. These students were instructed in the Self-Regulating Strategy Development
(STOP, AIM, DARE) model, which taught them how to plan and write an argumentative
essay. Throughout the study, the students spent a greater amount of time planning and
writing their papers, which became longer, more complex, and qualitatively better
(Kiuhara et al., 2012). This study demonstrated that teaching students with disabilities
how to plan and draft an argumentative essay can have a positive effect on how they
write and what they write (Kiuhura et al., 2012). Once students learn how to use the SelfRegulating strategy in one subject area, teachers in other content classes could teach
students how to apply it to their class. To successfully help students with disabilities,
researchers and teachers need to work together to select and create writing curriculum
and assessments that can be used to make valid, reliable intervention decisions.
Summary
The current literature review outlines the concerns of learning to write in high
school for post graduate success. All students, including students with LD are expected to
write both at a college and in the work place, in order to compete for job openings.
Without competent, comprehensive writing skills, employment and college opportunities
decrease. The implementation of purposeful writing assignments, teaching critical
thinking skills, engaging writing lessons incorporating UDL, and other researched based
strategies, such as scaffolding and explicit instruction will better prepare students for
38
achieving CCSS and meeting the rigors of college and the work force. The current project
has been developed to improve argumentative writing skills for students with LD and
allow these students to achieve proficiency in the relevant Common Core State
Standards.
39
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methods used to develop the framework for this
project. The following will be discussed: a) preparation for project development, b)
development of the curriculum unit, and c) implementation of the curriculum unit.
Preparation for Project Development
As previously discussed, educators need to implement curriculum incorporating
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and other evidence-based practices within the
classroom design to meet the new Common Core State Standards for writing. This unit
was developed using UDL to encompass individual writing goals, direct instruction, and
scaffolded lessons for argumentative writing. The idea that all students are able to access
core curriculum at grade level also was taken into consideration. Therefore, researchbased strategies were analyzed to find scaffolding strategies in order to assist students
with accessing the core curriculum. The current author also reviewed current literature
about students with writing disabilities and attended formal professional development in
writing goals aligned to the CCSS. In addition, she attended professional development for
implementation of UDL within a classroom at Sacramento County Office of Education
through Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) pathway trainings, local
Sacramento Unified School District workshops in goal writing for CCSS as well as
Special Education Local Plan Area (Region 3) writing workshops. The summer institute
for middle and high school writing through Advancement Via Individual Determination
(AVID) also influenced the development of the project. The author was also participated
40
in four separate writing workshops through the UC Berkeley History-Social Science
Project, which allowed the current authors’ student work to be analyzed by other teachers
and professors. These workshops focused on preparing students in writing across the
curriculum and utilizing research based strategies to strengthen their skills. Another
important component of this project was the training for the new Smarter Balance Testing
received by the current author that was then utilized in the classroom to teach students
with learning disabilities the accommodations/modifications options built into the
assessment of the CCSS.
The focus of this project was argumentative writing because as previously stated,
students with learning disabilities struggle with argumentative essay writing. Therefore,
this unit of curriculum was developed to be utilized within one Northern California high
school English classroom. The unit was field tested in the classroom over a four-month
period.
Development of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum
The curriculum unit was assembled with the following writing process in mind:
prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. It became very clear that the
particular group of freshman that the current author was teaching received low scores on
their writing benchmark assessments given through the Smarter Balance assessment prior
to the implementation of the writing unit. She discovered that there were pieces of the
writing process that were not demonstrated by most of the students. In particular, students
were not taking the time to prewrite and draft their essays. In fact, their initial essays
were their finished product and they spent no time correcting their errors.
41
The current author took this information and explored research-based
methodology that would scaffold the writing process. While that research was analyzed,
the current author began to write lesson plans that walk the students through the writing
process step-by-step using direct/explicit instruction. The Madeline Hunter Direct
Instruction Lesson Plan format (Hunter & Russell, 1994) was utilized to develop each
lesson. This lesson plan format allowed the teacher to scaffold the learning needs of the
students. This lesson plan format breaks the lesson into three categories: content, learner
behaviors, and teacher behaviors. The content category targets the following components:
grade level, content standards, student abilities or needs, rationale for teaching the lesson,
and allows the teacher to decide what content to teach. The learners’ behaviors allow the
teacher the opportunity to decide what they will do to learn and demonstrate that they
have learned. Finally, the teachers’ behavior helps the teacher to decide which researched
based teaching strategies are most effective in promoting learning for their students. The
following elements were considered when designing each explicit/direction instruction
lesson: learning objective, standards, materials, duration, anticipatory set, input,
modeling, checking for understanding, guided practice, and independent practice. It
should be noted not all of these elements were used in every lesson. For example, during
the lesson related to the final draft, there are no questions to check for understanding.
Therefore, those who implement this project should use their professional judgment as to
what elements of the lessons would work best in their classroom.
A writing prompt as well as informational text were chosen to inform the students
of the issue that they would be arguing. As each piece of the lesson plan was being
42
compiled, the author modified the scaffolding tools to ensure students would be able to
use them successfully within an explicit instruction lesson. Each lesson is broken down
according to the writing process: prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing.
There are nine lessons throughout the unit on argumentative writing with the majority of
time spent on building background and vocabulary to set the students up for the
prewriting stage of writing. The following six standards were addressed within the nine
lessons: 1) introduce precise claims and distinguish opposing claims, and create an
organization evidence that establishes clear relationships among claims; 2) develop
claims and counterclaims using evidence for each claim while pointing out the strengths
and limitations of the audience’s knowledge level and concerns; 3) provide a concluding
statement that supports the argument presented; 4) use technology, including the internet
to produce, publish, and update individual writing products; 5) engage the reader by
setting out a problem, situation, or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of
view of the narrator creating a smooth progression of experiences or events; and 6)
develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting
focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose.
Once the lessons were developed the unit was organized in a user-friendly order.
The introduction was drafted to provide a brief overview of what is available in the unit.
The current author then wrote detailed instructions on how to write a measureable IEP
goal aligned with the relevant CCSS and guidelines for the implementation of
explicit/direct instruction, UDL, scaffolding and other research-based organizational
strategies to teach students with learning disabilities. Next, the current author included
43
the nine unit lessons plans followed by materials to walk students through the step-bystep process of writing an argumentative essay. Included in order are the argumentative
writing prompts, transitional phrase poster, reference sheets, graphic organizer, foldables,
vocabulary grid, summary sheet, peer review sheet, edit chart, writing rubric and a list of
website to augment individual needs.
Implementation of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum
The curriculum unit was implemented twice with two separate writing prompts
over a four-month period. Each series of nine lessons took approximately two and a half
weeks depending on the learner. Nineteen freshman students with learning disabilities
were explicitly taught these 18 lessons. Prior to the first lesson, the current author (i.e.,
the teacher) took baseline data through an argumentative writing assignment. Students
were given a prompt with no organizer or foldable. The students were just given
informational text and asked to write their argumentative essay. Immediately after
baseline data was taken, the first lesson for the argumentative writing began.
Each of the nine lessons was taught using explicit instruction. Students were
given the learning objective and anticipatory set which allowed the teacher to tap into
prior knowledge. For example, in Lesson Five the teacher read “Kyle’s story” to tap into
students’ prior knowledge of bullying. The teacher then taught the main concepts and
skills of each lesson, emphasizing the expectations using visual examples. To illustrate in
Lesson Three, the foldable was modeled by explicitly teaching each step of how to
assemble the foldable as well as having a completed visual model which was displayed
on the whiteboard. The teacher checked for understanding throughout each lesson by
44
observing and interpreting the students’ active interest in the lesson plan. Throughout the
lessons, the teacher adjusted the lesson and instruction as needed as well as retaught
necessary concepts when students were struggling. The teacher used guided practice by
asking students questions that would demonstrate the skills being asked of them. For
instance, in Lesson Four, the teacher asked, “What evidence can you find in the article to
support your point of view?” Immediately, feedback was given after the student answered
so the students understood what was being asked of them after the student answered. All
students were then asked to independently practice to solidify skills and demonstrate their
knowledge and understanding of the argumentative writing assignment. Throughout the
implementation of the lessons, growth was measured using a four-point rubric that is used
for argumentative essays by the Smarter Balance assessment. As the needs of the
individual students were assessed, more time was incorporated as necessary throughout
certain lessons of this unit (CCSS, 2013).
45
Chapter 4
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT & RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter includes a detailed description of the completed project. The initial
findings from the implementation of the project are also discussed. Finally,
recommendations for practice and recommendations for future research are shared.
Description of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum
Based on the Common Core State Standards, meaningful and engaging strategies
are organized into a focused curriculum to develop argumentative writing skills for
struggling writers. With this curriculum, teachers will be able to teach multiple lessons
over a period of time, to their students, regarding effective argumentative writing. The
goal is for students to develop and learn to use valid reasoning to support their claims as
well as to provide relevant and sufficient evidence. The nine lessons offer strategies and
include technology to develop an organization and style that is appropriate to the task,
purpose and audience. Manipulatives, such as a foldable or graphic organizer, and
collaboration with peers can be used to develop and strengthen writing skills. The writing
process being taught includes the following stages, planning, revising, editing and
rewriting. Students will be taught to research multiple venues of digital resources that
encompass a focused question and demonstrate understanding of the subject under
investigation. Additionally, students will be asked to write over different time periods,
regarding different topics, and for different purposes. This unit could serve as a guide for
teachers to create a companion unit focused in more depth on teaching independent
writing acquisition skills which are aligned with CCSS and meet individual IEP writing
46
goals. For the curriculum unit, the following lessons plans were developed to benefit high
school students with learning disabilities in their writing processes.
Prewriting Lessons
The object of Lesson One is to identify and evaluate the artifacts that the students
will be reviewing. The first lesson is designed with direct instruction in mind and all
difficult vocabulary is frontloaded for the students to master prior to their reading in the
artifact. The students are responsible for writing the vocabulary word, writing the
meaning, drawing a picture, and then creating a sentence using the new vocabulary word.
The teacher can also read the first artifact aloud with the students listening and following
along, but not marking the text.
The object of Lesson Two is to distinguish key concepts by marking the text. The
second reading allows for breaking each paragraph apart. Therefore, the students will
number the paragraphs. The teacher again uses direct instruction to model the paragraph
numbering. To confirm that all students have the correct numbers on paragraphs, the
teacher calls out the numbers, and the students vocalize the first word in the sentence.
This close reading activity allows the students the opportunity to identify the
claims/concepts by underlining, highlighting, and circling the main points or words.
Students also summarize each paragraph on the left margin of the article. Once that task
is complete, the students peer share the facts they gathered from the article. At the end of
the peer sharing, students will share out one main concept that they heard.
Lesson Three involves asking students to compile their claim, reasoning for their
claim, and the facts to support their claim. This lesson begins with a modified version of
47
what Collin Education Associates (2012) call their 10% focus sheet (The current author
modified the sheet to meet the needs of the students at her Northern California High
School and the task that is asked of them). The teacher models a completed 10% sheet
and the expectations once it is filled out. The students will then be asked to complete
their 10% sheet. The teacher then uses explicit instructions to assemble the foldable that
will be used to outline their argument.
Lesson Four continues the compiling of the claim, along with all the facts on the
foldable. The students will be asked to compose a rebuttal to their claim. Finally, the
students establish a concluding statement that supported their initial claim. One-on-one
support will be to assist struggling writers. All students will read the outline aloud to staff
to ensure all ideas were grounded. The teacher will also model a strong conclusion
statement to further assist students develop their writing.
Drafting Lessons
Lesson Five involves the students writing the first draft of their argumentative
essay. The students draft the first draft of their essay from what they read on their 10%
sheet and their foldable. One-on-one assistance is given as needed. Students save their
rough draft to My Big Campus or Google.docs.
Revising Lesson
Lesson Six focuses on the students completing the rough draft of their
argumentative essay. When completed, all students will print out the essay for peer
editing. The rough draft will be read aloud to a peer/staff member. Students will take the
feedback and revise the essay as needed.
48
Editing Lessons
Lesson Seven allows for peer editing. Peer editors will be given a peer-editing
sheet, and a editor’s sheet. Explicit instruction on the editor’s sheet as well as on the peerediting sheet will also be given. Students then edit their peer’s work and give feedback on
the worksheet and essay.
In lesson Eight, student work will be returned and students will be asked to select
a different peer with whom to share. Students then give verbal feedback for the second
peer editing process. Then the opposite peer reads their essay and gathers information on
edits they should make. This concludes the peer-editing workshop.
Publishing Lesson
Lesson Nine will allow the students time to go back to their original rough draft,
and make corrections on their papers, prior to being submitted. Lastly, the essays will be
submitted to the teacher and scored with the argumentative essay-writing rubric.
Although direct instruction and explicit modeling are to be kept in mind during
the progression of this unit, scaffolds can be designed and modified to achieve a
successful outcome with the argumentative essay. The following scaffolds are to be used
to support student learning: foldable, transition sentence frames, transition word
resources, essay starter sheet, and graphic organizers for multiple learning levels. Other
resources to be used to ensure students are successful throughout the writing process
include: argument reference sheet, writing prompts, transition posters, peer review sheets,
editing chart, and a writing rubric for argumentative writing using the Smarter Balance
Assessment Rubric. Furthermore, direct instruction, scaffolding lessons, UDL strategies,
49
and executive functioning strategies should be used. Additionally, in the curriculum unit,
the current author included a list of websites that might be helpful to other classrooms
teachers who implement this program.
Outcome of the Implementation of the Argumentative Writing Curriculum
The curriculum unit was implemented by the current author with nineteen
freshman students with learning disabilities at one high school in Northern California.
The lessons were taught twice with two separate writing prompts over a four-month
period. Each series of nine lessons took approximately two and a half weeks depending
on the learner. After implementation of the lessons described above, there was
encouraging growth by the students.
Growth during these lessons was considered to have occurred when the students
were able to move from a score of one on the four point rubric scale to a score of two.
The growth that was displayed through the students’ essays supported the use of
explicit/direct instruction to teach writing skills to high school students. Using the
sources available in this unit may help other students achieve an appropriately written
argumentative essay over time. Each step of the writing process must be explicitly taught
and chunked to meet the needs of individual students. The four point rubric scale
modified from the Smarter Balance Assessment represents the following: one is far below
proficiency; two is below proficiency; three is proficient; and four is advanced.
50
Baseline scores
The baseline score of argumentative essays represented the students’ writing
without any scaffolds or direct instruction. Sixteen of the essays scored a one on the fourpoint rubric scale, three students score a two.
Scores after First Set of Nine Lessons
After giving the students a graphic organizer to use along with explicit instruction
to complete the task, their second essays resulted in higher scores on the four-point
rubric. With this one scaffolding tool, six students still scores a one. However, amazingly,
nine students scored a two and three students received a 2.5, and one student received a
three.
Scores after Second Set of Nine Lessons
The third essay with the foldable completed after 18 lessons showed even more
promise. Four students received a three, one received a 3.5, 11 students received a two,
and three students received a one on the four-point rubric scale. Although some of the
students, even with the scaffolds, still scored a one, it was noted that there were more
learners that were independent, rather than teacher dependent. With more practice over a
longer period of time, all the students will hopefully reach mastery. Overall, the students
made the most growth qualitatively. A quality essay contains a claim, three supporting
reason with quotes from the informational text, and a rebuttal along with a conclusion. In
addition, the final product is to be typewritten with minimal spelling and sentence
structure mistakes. With the implementation of these lessons over time, the current author
would expect even more growth that would increase the length and quality of the essays.
51
Based on the findings from the implementation of the curriculum unit, scaffolding
lessons appears to be a highly effective way to offer support to any learner. It allows the
learner a temporary support so they can move toward new concepts, new levels of
understanding, and a new language. Scaffolding enables the learner independence to
know how to do something so they can complete similar tasks independently. With
carefully designed lessons, temporary supports allow students to be able to learn new
writing skills. Once those skills have been mastered, the temporary supports can be
removed allowing the student to utilize the acquired skills alone in the future.
When developing lessons for a writing unit, it is very important to use UDL
strategies including self-regulation skills, such as goal setting, self-monitoring, selfinstruction, and self-reinforcement, which are designed to help students manage writing
strategies, the writing process, and their behavior. It is important to know the students’
current skill levels in writing in order to support them adequately so they may complete
the task. Once the teacher has assessed the students’ baseline abilities, there is a plethora
of resources online and in textbooks regarding writing strategies that can help students be
more successful in writing. Without supports such as these in the classroom setting,
students rarely complete the task to their full potential. Examples of effective support
systems incorporated into the current argumentative writing curriculum unit include:
check off sheets, simple weekly or monthly calendars to write due dates down, others
may need a more intensive support (i.e. graphic organizer, outline, foldable). These
supports were chosen solely on student need and scaffolded into the lesson prior to the
lesson beginning.
52
With less than four months of practice with argumentative writing and using
different prompts, it is evident from the writing produced by nineteen students that
scaffolding (foldable/organizer) can help high school writers successfully organize their
own argumentative essay and help them become independent writers.
Recommendations for Future Practice
It is clear that writing skills of high school students with learning disabilities need
to improve and that is why this current unit of curriculum was developed. The main focus
on this unit of curriculum is the writing process in itself. The purpose of this writing unit
is to teach the students to collect, analyze, synthesize, and communicate information and
their opinions while keeping the audience, purpose and occasion in perspective.
This curriculum unit provides nine lessons plans followed by materials to walk
students through the step-by-step process of writing an argumentative essay. Included are
the argumentative writing prompts, transitional phrase poster, reference sheets, graphic
organizer, foldables, vocabulary grid, summary sheet, peer review sheet, edit chart,
writing rubric and a list of website to augment individual needs. This curriculum can be
easily adapted to different situations. For example, if the writing prompts and
informational text do not fit in a particular class, the educator could still use the lesson
with their own writing prompt and informational text. Students need to be exposed to a
variety of text genres; therefore, it is important to have web resources, historical
documents, etc. available to them. If a teacher already has a document source that is
applicable, then it can be used.
53
The current author recommends preplanning multiple means of scaffolding.
Future teachers should plan scaffolding within the lessons by preplanning to address the
individual needs of the student in the classroom in order to meet students IEP goals.
Throughout the lessons, teachers should note the importance of using UDL, in
conjunction with scaffolding, to meet all students’ needs was noted. In practice, progress
monitoring should be implemented throughout the unit so educators can assess student
performance in writing and to evaluate the specific skills that students have development.
This evaluation will allow teachers to revise the curriculum accordingly. If progress is
inadequate, other research-based strategies can be implemented. On the other hand, if
students’ goals have been met, the teacher has the data to make changes to the IEP goal
and to challenge the student to further meet grade level Common Core State Standards.
As the curriculum evolves, teachers should incorporate new teaching strategies to
produce the best student outcomes.
For further development of the argumentative writing curriculum, the current
author plans to add sentence frames to future implementation of the writing assignments
to assist individual students who need extra support. She will also determine whether the
materials can be differentiated even more to meet individual needs of other students.
Additionally, the current author will be sharing the curriculum unit with colleagues at her
school who serve students with disabilities so they too may use to teach argumentative
writing skills. Ultimately, she plans to make the curriculum available to other schools
within the local high school district and the local elementary school district and to
provide technical assistance as necessary.
54
Another area for future implementation would be to utilize this particular
curriculum to meet CCSS writing standards across different curricular disciplines. A first
step would be to have cross-curricular conversations among teachers across content areas.
These conversations would allow teachers to share their understandings of the content
and to brainstorm how the argumentative writing curriculum unit could be implemented
across content areas.
In addition to implementing the argumentative writing curriculum, another
recommendation is for teachers to pursue professional development opportunities in UDL
strategies and explicit instruction in their local area. One of the most important things
educators can do is to continuously seek to deliver instruction that empowers students to
effectively apply their knowledge in real-world situations.
Recommendations for Future Research
For the current project, the argumentative writing curriculum was piloted tested
with one group of high school students with learning disabilities. Future research should
be conducted with a larger sample size of students with learning disabilities and across a
number of high schools to assess the validity of the curriculum. In addition, a longitudinal
analysis could be implemented to assess the validity of the curriculum as well as measure
the growth of students’ writing from year to year from 9th to 12th grade. Further
investigation can also be done to consider how the various parts of the curriculum
actually supports students’ growth. Lastly, the research in writing for high school student
with learning disabilities is limited, therefore further research needs to be done in this
area.
55
APPENDIX A: How to Support the Claim: An Argumentative Writing Unit
56
How to Support the Claim:
An Argumentative Writing Unit
Malissa Stotts
Spring 2014
57
Contact Information: Malissa Stotts
Liberty Ranch High School
12945 Marengo Road
Galt, CA 95632
mstotts@ghsd.k12.ca.us
58
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 60
Gaining an Access Point for Writing IEP Goals ................................. 62
Explicit/Direct Instruction..................................................................... 64
Scaffolding Lessons and UDL ........................................................... 65
Guidelines for Implementing Scaffolding ........................................... 67
Researched Based Scaffolding Strategies ........................................ 68
Research Based Organizational Strategies ....................................... 70
Universal Designing for Learning Strategies ...................................... 72
Lesson 1 – Evaluation of the Artifacts ................................................ 75
Lesson 2 – Distinguishing Key Concepts ........................................... 77
Lesson 3 – Marking Up the Text ....................................................... 79
Lesson 4 – Compiling Claims/Prewriting............................................ 81
Lesson 5 - Prewriting /Foldable ......................................................... 83
Lesson 6 – Rough Draft ..................................................................... 86
Lesson 7 – Peer Editing ..................................................................... 88
Lesson 8 – Peer Editing ..................................................................... 90
Lesson 9 – Revision/Publishing ......................................................... 92
2. OTHER RESOURCES .......................................................................... 94
Argumentative Writing Prompts ......................................................... 94
Transitional Phrase Poster Binder Resource ..................................... 95
59
Argumentative Essay Reference Sheet ........................................... . 96
Argumentative Graphic Organizer ................................................. .... 97
Argumentative Essay Foldable #1 .................................................... 98
Argumentative Essay Foldable #2 ................................................... . 99
Argumentative Essay Foldable Bottom ............................................ 100
Vocabulary Grid ............................................................................... 101
Summary Sheet ............................................................................... 102
Transitional Words and Phrases Argument Chart .......................... . 103
Peer Review Sheet ..................................................................... .... 104
Editing Chart .................................................................................... 105
Writing Rubric ................................................................................ . 106
Website References ......................................................................... 107
Project References .......................................................................... 108
60
This unit was designed to be used by special education teachers in a RSP
setting English class to augment argumentative essay writing. These writing skills
are aligned with IEP goals and allow an access point for students with learning
disabilities. This unit will allow high school students opportunities to achieve their
IEP goals and be prepared to meet the rigorous course work expected of them
through the CCSS. The unit will also help high school students prepare for
college expectations, trade schools, and the work place. This writing unit is not
designed to supplant the literary instruction students should receive in their
content course. Rather, it is meant to reinforce many basic skills in writing and to
support special education students in their core classes. This unit was designed
to guide the special education teacher who has expertise in teaching strategies
for struggling writers. Graham (2008) suggests the following research-based
writing strategies for all students:
1. Dedicate time to writing, and expose students to various forms of writing
over time.
2. Increase the knowledge students’ have about writing.
61
3. Nurture students’ interest, enjoyment, and motivation to write.
4. Modeling writing strategies so students become strategic writers.
5. Teach writing skills to mastery.
6. Use technological writing tools.
7. Assess students’ progress to gauge their needs.
This unit has explicit lessons and strategies that can be used to support
students with specific writing skills. This unit was designed to build background
knowledge and skills for students to apply those skills through a challenging
writing assignment at each student’s independent writing level. These lessons
can be used independently to support a particular skill a student may need. This
writing unit may also be used as an entire unit from beginning to end.
As the unit was developed, attention was paid to the feedback of special
education teachers at the authors Northern California high school campus.
Writing workshops, UDL, and researched based strategies provided direction to
this unit of curriculum. For teachers wanting more information on CCSS, UDL,
and strategies for writing instruction, refer to the references at the end of the unit.
62
Gaining an Access Point for Writing IEP Goals
Due to the CCSS and IEP goals being written at grade level the following
methodology was used to write IEP writing goals for the students at this Northern
California High School. An instructionally appropriate IEP can be developed for a
student not at grade level. To begin, the special education teacher must assess
the present level of academic achievement and functional performance. This will
indicate how the student is performing at baseline and in relation to the CCSS at
the current grade level. Also, this would identify specific skills and knowledge that
would aid the student to work toward current and future grade level CCSS. When
assessing present levels of performance, it is imperative that the information is
complete, thorough, and focuses on the students strengths and needs in relation
to accessing the general education curriculum. Data should be included from
evaluations, assessments and feedback from all members of the IEP team. An
example would be, when given a graphic organizer for organization and word
banks for temporal and linking words, the student can construct a 5-paragraph
paper with a topic sentence, three details per paragraph, and a concluding
sentence. The student should able to spell grade level words and use correct
mechanics with 80% accuracy. In addition, due to fine motor deficits, the student
may require typing in lieu of writing by hand. This detail not only tells the teacher
where to begin instruction based on what has been provided, but it also allows
the student to continue at an appropriate rate regardless of school standards.
63
Not only does the IEP goal tell exactly what the student will be working
towards, but it also must be a developmentally and instructionally appropriate so
that the goal can be measured throughout the year. The following components
should be addressed: who the student is, what will they do (behavior), under
what conditions, what criteria, and to what standard. For example, Josh (who) will
correctly add single-digit sums (behavior) using math manipulatives (conditions)
at least 90% of the time (criterion) by the end of the first grade year (time frame).
It is critical to choose appropriate CCSS and staircase the standard so that an
entry point can be achieved for the student with an IEP. An entry point refers to
the skills level/grade level of the student in reference to the standard. Even if a
student is in the 4th grade and at the 2nd grade instructional level, you must still
start at the 4th grade standards to allow for age appropriate access to the
curriculum. The level of support needed is assessed and written into the IEP
through accommodations and modifications. Also, UDL strategies should be
incorporated into lessons to support student goals.
64
Explicit/Direct Instruction
Often students with LD are not motivated to write. They see no point to the
writing assignment and avoid it at all costs. This often leads to low scores in their
writing assignments and failure to pass high school general education English
classes. Students often think of writing assignments as just another activity for
their teacher. Students need to know that writing is part of the learning process
and that their writing is not merely busy work, but an integral part of the lesson.
Student must be encouraged and taught that what they write is valued.
With encouragement, educators can have a great effect on the quality of
writing that students can produce. For instance, if teachers are highly focused,
use explicit teaching strategies during the planning, revise, and/or editing student
writing before final product the quality of the students writing increases. With this
support from teachers, students have proven to be successful in the writing and
meeting CCSS. Without instructional strategies such as this, most students with
LD lack the ability to preplan or revise their work on their own. In fact, most turn
in their first draft as their final product. With the new CCSS, teachers can afford
to take the time to teach deep analytical thinking skills that would allow students
to produce well-written assignments. Teachers have the time and ability to model
quality writing samples as well as provide multiple literary examples to elicit
writing from students that makes a difference later in their life. For the purpose of
this project, lessons with direct instruction and explicit modeling were kept in
mind in order to encourage improved student writing.
65
Scaffolding Lessons and UDL
With the increased need of standards based curriculum, teachers need to
teach writing strategies to meet the CCSS to give all students equal access to
the curriculum. While teaching this curriculum, teachers need to embrace and
implement UDL which will meet the needs of all students who are in schools,
including students with a wide range of sensory, motor, cognitive, linguistic
needs and disabilities, rather than a small group of students that are in the
middle of the famous bell curve (Hitchcock & Stahl, 2003). UDL is used to offer
teachers materials, methods, and forms of assessments to create ways to think
about planning. Also, UDL creates methods in which teachers can reach their
students IEP goals, through multiple means of engagement, representation,
action and expression. With UDL, teachers are able to enhance learning with
strategies and instruction, thus utilizing ways to develop and obtain accessibility
to academic materials. These materials can then be scaffold to serve a diverse
group of students. Finally, UDL provides methods for assessments that are
accessible and appropriate for all learners (Hitchcock & Stahl, 2003). In effect,
teachers help students achieve writing proficiency by including lessons on basic
writing strategies that can be grasped by all students of varying learning levels.
It has been proven that writers that are struggling also face considerable
barriers in the “real” world (Graham, 2008). At work, writing is a gateway for
employment and promotion, especially in salaried positions. Those seeking
66
employment in businesses as well as government and state jobs must be able to
create clearly written documents, memoranda, technical reports, and electronic
messages (Graham, 2008). Writing also influences the participation in civic life
and the community at large. With the continuous change of technology, one is
increasingly required to write through email and text messaging. This puts
urgency on the need to have basic writing skills in order to communicate in the
world’s increasingly fast-paced multimedia.
67
Guidelines for Implementing Scaffolding
The following points can be used as guidelines when implementing instructional
scaffolding (adapted from Hogan and Pressley, 1997).

Tasks must match curriculum goals and individual students’ needs.
Students need to be involved in creating instructional goals (which
increases students’ motivation and their learning commitment).

Students’ backgrounds and prior knowledge need to be used to assess
their progress (motivation is reduced if material is too easy, as well as if
material is too difficult, students’ will turn off).

A variety of supports can measure student progress through a task
such as prompts, questions, hints, stories, models, visual scaffolding.
Alibali (2006) suggests the following supports: pointing, gestures,
diagrams, and other methods of highlighting visual information.

Nurture, encourage and praise to motivate students. Ask questions that
allow student to explain their progress, which will encourage them to
stay focused on the goal.

Give feedback on student progress (teacher feedback allows to see
what they have accomplished and what they need to complete).

Encourage students to take risks and try alternatives in a safe, and
supportive learning environment (no negative responses).

Encourage student to practice the task in different contexts.
68
Researched Based Scaffolding Strategies
Scaffold
Ways to use Scaffolds in an Instructional Setting
Advance
organizers
Tools to introduce new content, tasks allow student to
understand the topic:
 Venn diagrams to compare and contrast
information.
 Flow charts to illustrate processes.
 Organizational charts to illustrate hierarchies.
 Outlines that represent content; mnemonics to
assist recall.
 Statements to situate the task or content; rubrics
that provide task expectations
Cue Cards
Prepared cards given to individual or groups assist in
their discussion about a particular topic or content area:
 Vocabulary words to prepare for exams.
 content-specific stem sentences to complete.
 formulae to associate with a problem
 concepts to define.
Concept and
mind maps
Relationships Maps:
 Prepare partially completed maps for students to
complete.
 Students create their own maps based on their
current knowledge of the concept.
Examples
Samples, illustrations, problems:
 Real objects
 Illustrative
 Problems to represent something.
Explanations
Detailed information to move students along on a task:
 Written instructions for a task
 Verbal explanation of how a process.
Handouts
Handouts:
 Content-related information
 Less detail and room for note taking.
Hints
Suggestions and clues:
 “place your foot in front of the other”
 “use the escape key”
69


Prompts
“find the subject of the verb”
“add the water first and then the acid”
Physical or verbal cue aids in recall of prior or assumed
knowledge.
 Physical: Body movements such as pointing,
nodding the head, eye blinking, foot tapping.
 Verbal: Words, statements and questions such as
“Go,” “Stop,” “It’s right there,” “Tell me
now,” “What toolbar menu item would you press
to insert an image?” “Tell me why the character
acted that way.”
Question Cards Index cards with content or questions:
 Given to individuals or groups of students to ask
each other pertinent questions about a particular
topic or content area.
Question Stems Incomplete sentences:
 Encourages deep thinking by using higher order
“What if” questions.
Stories
Visual Scaffolds
(Adapted from:
Alibali, 2006)
Stories relate complex and abstract material to situations
that are familiar to the student:
 Recite stories to inspire and motivate learners.





Pointing (call attention to an object).
Representational gestures (holding curved hands
apart to illustrate roundness.
Moving rigid hands diagonally upward to illustrate
steps or process).
Diagrams, charts and graphs.
Highlighting visual information.
70
Research Based Organizational Strategies
Calendars and Planners
A calendar/planner is a schedule that is filed out by the student prioritizing
their time and planning a suitable course load, hours of productivity, and specific
objective (Willis, Hoben, & Myette, 1995). Calendar should include guidance in
prioritizing appointments, commitments, due dates, and tests for each day (Di
Tommaso, 2005).
Notebook Organization
Color-coded tabs or folders are used to improve the organizational skills,
comprehension, and retention of work. Tabs also help with dividing specific
elements of class such as homework, class work, lectures, and so on (Willis, et
al., 1995).
Note-taking Strategies
Students organize material with note taking strategies. Students may do
this through summarizing the reading and marking the text, and then recording
the information in the notebook (Di Tommaso, 2005). Students can write notes
on their thoughts during a lecture or discussion the lecture with a peer to improve
the comprehension and retention of information (Hallowell & Ratey, 1994;
Schwiebert, Sealander, & Dennison, 2002).
71
Visual Organizational Maps
Organizational maps which are visual such as flowcharts, clusters, lists,
and outlines, organize class content (Di Tommaso, 2005). Student’s put their
ideas into the maps or outline to organize their thoughts and to write papers.
There are many outlines that teachers can use that come in different formats
(description, cause-effect, problem-solution, etc.) (Di Tommaso, 2005).
Clarifying Questions
Asking explicit questions can help the student understand the steps they
plan to take to achieve a particular goal or organizational strategy. While asking
questions teachers can assess what students understand about the task: what
information is most important, where to find it, express and present it, and how
to proceed when a goal is not reached (Oliver, Hecker, Klucken, Westby, 2000;
Willis et al., 1995).
Feedback
Feedback is vital for students to monitor their progress. It allows a
student to understand what is expected of them and if they are meeting the
objective (Villa et al., 2005). This strategy works well during peer reviews.
Students are given a feedback sheet with questions for their peers to fill out.
This strategy reinforces the structure or organization of the information presented
in class (Oliver et al., 2000; Rose, Meyer & Hitchcock, 2005).
72
Universal Designing for Learning Strategies
Recruiting Interest Options
Provide learners with discretion and foster their individuality as much
as possible when providing choices in the level of challenge, tools used, color,
design and layout of graphics, and sequence of timed tasks (CAST, 2011).
Design activities that are varied and that can be personalized to the learner’s
lives. Implement tasks that are culturally responsive to different racial, cultural,
ethnic and gender groups. Provide tasks that incorporate active participation,
exploration and experimentation. Allow for personal responses, evaluation,
and self-reflection to content and activities (Center for Applied Special
Technology, 2011).
Sustaining Effort and Persistence Options
Use prompts or requirements that explicitly restate goals. Allow
opportunities for collaboration, peer tutoring and other means of support. Use
cooperative learning groups, which encompass scaffold roles and
responsibilities. Create virtual communities of learners that are engaged in
common interests or activities. Differentiate the amount of difficulty within core
activities so tasks can be completed by all learners (CAST, 2011).
Self-Regulation Options
Use prompts, reminders, guides, rubrics, and checklists that focus on
self-regulatory goals. Use differentiated models, scaffolds and feedback to
manage frustration, develop internal controls and coping skills. Utilize
73
resources or charts to assist individuals to collect, chart and display data about
their own behavior (CAST, 2011).
Perception Options
Use text equivalents for automated speech-to-text for spoken language.
Provide visual diagrams, charts, notations. Vary information in a flexible format
including: size of the text, images, graphs, tables. Use color to contrast text or
images (CAST, 2011).
Language, Mathematical Expression and Symbols Options
Pre-teach vocabulary that allow learners to connect experiences and
prior knowledge. Present key concepts in one form of symbolic representation
(i.e. expository text or math equation) with an alternate form (comic strip,
storyboard, animation, dance/movement) (CAST, 2011).
Comprehension Options
Activate prior knowledge using organizers and pre-teach critical
prerequisite concepts through models and concrete objects. Bridge concepts
with relevant analogies, metaphors highlighting patterns, critical features and
the big ideas. Use cues and prompts to draw attention to critical features and
chunk information into smaller elements. Use checklists, organizers, sticky
notes and electronic reminders (CAST, 2011).
Physical Action Options
Provide alternatives in requirements for rate, timing, and range of
motor action necessary to interact with instructional material, manipulatives
74
and technologies. Provide alternatives for physically interacting with materials
(CAST, 2011).
Expression and Communication Options
Compose in multiple media such as text, speech, drawing, illustration,
comics, storyboards and video. Provide spell checkers, grammar checkers,
word prediction software, speech-to-text software human dictation and
recording. Provide calculators, graphing calculator and pre-formatted graphing
paper. Sentence strips, story webs, outlining tools and concept mapping.
Provide scaffolds that can be removed as independence and skills increase
(CAST, 2011).
Executive Functions Options
Use prompts and scaffolds to track effort, resources, and difficultly in
the process of goal setting. The learner should be provided with checklists
for goal-setting, project planning, note-taking, self-monitoring, templates for
prioritization and steps needed to obtain the goal. Break long-term goals or
projects into chunks so students can achieve their short-term objectives (CAST,
2011).
75
Class: RSP English
Unit: Argumentative Writing
Lesson Number: 1
Objectives
 Students will write arguments to support their claim to a topic, using valid
reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

Students will be able to identify what the problem is and understand
artifacts to establish their point of view.

Students will be able to evaluate their personal experiences or events
to establish their claim about their writing prompt.

Students will draw evidence from literary texts to support analysis,
reflection, and research.
Standards
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events
Materials
1. Argument writing prompts
2. Copy of article(s) for each student addressing prompt
3. Foldable blank piece of paper/or vocabulary grid in Appendix B
4. Picture of Mr. Mojo to start lesson
Duration
58 minutes
Anticipatory Set:
Teacher will gain engagement of students by talking about recent assembly
“Mojo Up.” Teacher will ask students to verbally articulate the key points the
speaker made. Teacher will write them on the board. Students will share out
personal experiences that they have experienced or witnessed.
Teaching:
Input
Provide newspaper artifact that will be read. Frontload all difficult vocabulary
from the artifacts.
76
Modeling
Teacher will model a simple 5 squared foldable that the students will write key
vocabulary on. Students will be responsible for writing the word, picture, what
the word means and a sentence. Teacher will do a first read of artifact.
Questioning Strategies
What facts would you select to show the principal that there is bullying in high
schools?
What other way would you plan to bring attention to bullying?
What evidence can you find in the artifacts that happen here at our school?
Guided Practice
 This part of the lesson allows students an opportunity to demonstrate their
understanding of the vocabulary from the informational text selected.
 The students understanding of the lesson by working through an activity or
exercise under the teacher’s supervision.
 This is the time for the teacher to move around the room and determine
the level of mastery and to provide individual remediation, if necessary.
Closure
Last 5 minutes students will review vocabulary that they did not know. Student
will write down one fact on a vocabulary card that they learned today.
77
Lesson Number: 2
Objectives
 Students will draw evidence from literary texts to support analysis,
reflection, and research.

Students will break distinguish key concepts by marking up the text.

Students will be able clearly identify claims about within the artifact.

Students will analyze and evaluate a work of literature.
Standards
W 9-10.1.a – Introduce precise claims, distinguish the claim from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships
among claims through evidence.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events
Materials
Clear plastic sleeve, expo markers, literary article, eraser, post-its, pencils,
rubric.
Duration
Two 58 minutes periods
Anticipatory Set:
Start the lesson by writing the following quote on the board~
“What if the kid you bullied at school, grew up, and turned out to be the
only surgeon who could save your life?” – Lynette Mather
Discuss the implications of this quote in depth.
Teaching:
Input
Teacher and students will reread the literary articles using a close reading
activity. Students will number the paragraphs and the teacher will ask them to
tell her the first word of each article to ensure they are numbered correctly.
Teacher will model how to identify key concepts and claims by underlining
78
them and circling key words through an Elmo/Projector. Students will be
asked to complete a portion of the articles on their own and talk with their
neighbor and have a collaborative conversation about what they underlined
and circled. Share out as a whole group what students came up with.
Go over rubric for writing prompt.
Questioning Strategies
What facts have you complied about your position?
What changes would you make to the school to stop bullying?
Closure
Teacher will review verbally by asking students significant points about
their position. Key points from each article will be reviewed by asking
students what significantly impacted them from the article.
79
Lesson Number: 3
Objectives
 Students will compile their claim, reasons for their claim, along with
fact to support their claim. Students will then compose a rebuttal to
their claim.

Gather relevant information from print sources, assess the credibility
and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while
avoiding plagiarism.
Standards
W 9-10.1.a – Introduce precise claims, distinguish the claim from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships
among claims through evidence.
W.9-10.1.c. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events.
Materials
 Article(s) for each student
 Modified focus sheet
 Argument foldable
 Pencils
 Glue
 Scissors.
Duration
116 minutes
Anticipatory Set:
Teacher will gain engagement through the following quote:
“It is our choices … that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.” –
J.K Rowling
Give students an example of how this influences our daily lives.
80
Teaching:
Input
 Teacher will disburse the articles and modified 10% focus sheet. Students
will be given time to gather the information from their articles on the focus
sheet. Teacher will model how the focus sheet will be filled out and show
the students a good example of what a claim looks like.

Once completed students will be given the argument foldable which
they will glue to a colored piece of paper. Students will cut a line on each
section so as they are filling out their information to each section and
then they can cover it back up.

Teacher will again model the expectation for each section by giving
examples from the articles. Students will be given time state their position
and fill in their evidence for their claim.

Student will then be given an example of a rebuttal and then asked to fill
in their rebuttal for their claim.
Questioning Strategies
How would you paraphrase your facts?
What evidence supports your point of view?
What evidence can you find in the article to support your point of view?
Guided Practice
 Teacher will be checking in with individual students to check for
understanding of assignment.

Guide students if they are struggling with the foldable worksheet.
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will compose a list on the board of information the
students need in order to continue to finish the foldable activity. This information
will use to accommodate many learners that may need a bit more writing time
than others. Foldable and 10% focus sheet will all be collected to further assess
any portion of the lesson that must be re-taught.
81
Lesson Number: 4
Objectives
 Students will produce clear and coherent writing in which the
development, organization, and style are appropriate toe the task,
purpose, and audience.

Students will compile their claim, reasons for their claim, along with facts
to support their claim in a foldable.

Students will then compose a rebuttal to their claim.

Students will establish a concluding statement that supports the
argument presented.
Standards
W 9-10.1.a – Introduce precise claims, distinguish the claim from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships
among claims through evidence.
W.9-10.1.c. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.1.e. – Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and
supports the argument presented.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events
Materials
 Article(s) for each student addressing prompt
 Modified focus sheet
 Argument foldable
 Pencils
 Glue
 Highlighter
 Scissors
Duration
58 minutes will be needed.
82
Anticipatory Set:
Teacher will gain engagement through the following quote:
“It is our choices … that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.”
– J.K Rowling
Build on this quote asking students to think about someone in their lives who
exhibits these positive qualities. Have students verbalize how those moments
have impacted them.
Teaching:
Input
 Teacher will model a completed argument foldable and then put it
on the white board for further viewing.
 Teacher will disburse the articles and modified 10% focus sheet.
Students will be given time to finish gathering information for the
argument foldable.
 Students will be questioned to see what evidence they are coming
up with to support their claim.
 Students who are struggling will be worked one-on-one with later in
the period.
 Students will be asked to come up with a strong conclusion statement.
The teacher will model a strong conclusion statement.
 Time will be given for the students to complete their foldable.
This foldable will serve as their rough draft of their essay.
Questioning Strategies
How would you paraphrase your facts?
What evidence can you find in the article to support your point of view?
Guided Practice
Teacher will be checking in with individual students to check for understanding
of assignment and guide students if they are struggling with the foldable
worksheet.
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will compose a list of students ready to go to the
computer lab. This information will use to accommodate many learners that
may need a bit more writing time than others.
83
Lesson Number: 5
Objectives
 Students will compile their claim, reasons for their claim, along with facts
to support their claim in a foldable.

Students will then compose a rebuttal to their claim.

Students will establish a concluding statement that supports the argument
presented.
Standards
W 9-10.1.a – Introduce precise claims, distinguish the claim from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships
among claims through evidence.
W.9-10.1.C. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.1.e. – Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and
supports the argument presented.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events.
Materials
 Copy of article(s) for each student addressing prompt
 Modified focus sheet
 Argument foldable
 Pencils
 Glue stick
 Highlighter
 Scissors
 Kyle’s story or any other inspirational story of survival from bullying or
about bullying.
Duration
58 minutes will be needed.
84
Anticipatory Set:
 Teacher will gain engagement through an inspirational reading of a
student that was bullied and then gave a speech at his high school
graduation about bullying.
 This story can be found by typing into the internet “Story of Kyle,
nothing beats a friend.” This is a story that is a twist off one that is
written in Chicken Soup for the Soul.
 Although it has the same storyline, the differences in names and what
person (first or third) it is being written still inspire the true effect of
bullying.
 Teacher will elaborate on what each student can do to change either
their situation, or someone else’s situation. In addition, other resources
were utilized on our Northern California campus.
Teaching:
Input
 Teacher will disburse the articles, modified 10% focus sheet (Collins,
2012) and foldables.

Students will be given time to finish gathering information for the
argument foldable.

Students are questioned to see what evidence they are coming up with
to support their claim.

Teacher will model a strong conclusion statement.

Students are asked to come up with a strong conclusion statement.

Time is given for the students to complete their foldable.
Questioning Strategies
How would you paraphrase your facts?
What evidence supports your point of view?
What evidence can you find in the article to support your point of view?
Guided Practice
Teacher will be checking in with individual students:
 Check for understanding of assignment
 Guide students if they are struggling with the foldable worksheet.
85
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will compose a list of students ready to go to the
computer lab. This information will use to accommodate many learners that
may need a bit more writing time than others.
86
Lesson Number: 6
Objectives
 Students will use their foldable to type their claim, reasons for their claim,
facts to support their claim, rebuttal and concluding statement in a formal
essay.

Students will use technology to type a draft of their essay and then save
it on My Big Campus or Google Docs for further editing.
Standards
W 9-10.1.a - Introduce precise claims, distinguish the claim from alternate or
opposing claims, and create an organization that establishes clear relationships
among claims through evidence.
W.9-10.1.c. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.1.e. – Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and
supports the argument presented.
W.9-10.6. – Use technology, including the internet to produce, publish, and
update individual writing products, taking advantage of technology’s capacity to
link other information and to display information flexibly and dynamically.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or events
Materials
 Copy of article(s) for each student addressing prompt
 Modified focus sheet
 Argument foldable
 Computer
 White paper.
Duration
116 minutes will be needed.
87
Anticipatory Set:
Students will be reminded of the contract they signed at the beginning of the year
and appropriate computer use.
Teaching:
Input
 Students will be individually working on typing their rough draft of their essay
using resources such as the articles and the foldable.

Students will be reminded on how to save to Google docs or My Big Campus
for further editing of their papers.

Students will print out their papers for peer editing.
Guided Practice
Teacher will be checking in with individual students:
 Check for understanding of assignment
 Guide students if they are struggling with the typing their essay.
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will rotate around the room to gage how much time
will be need to complete the typing.
88
Lesson Number: 7
Objectives
 Students will develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning,
revising, editing, rewriting.

Students will peer edit other students papers.

Students will be able to identify the claim, 3 points, evidence to back
those points, rebuttal and the conclusion using the peer editing sheet.
Standards
W.9-10.1.C. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events.
W.9-10.5. – Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising,
editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most
significant for a specific purpose.
Materials
 Well-written argumentative essay that can be found on the internet or the
educator can write one themselves.
 Printed copy of first draft of essay
 Pens
 Editor’s worksheet
 Peer-evaluating sheet
 Rubric
Duration
90 minutes are needed
Anticipatory Set:
Project a well-written argumentative essay. Talk about the components that are
needed to support a claim.
89
Teaching:
Input
 Teacher will hand out editing symbols work sheet for the students to use
for guidance while editing their peer’s paper.

Teacher will go over every editing symbol so our editing language in the
classroom will be universal among all students.

Students will then be asked to fill in their peer evaluating sheet. Teacher
will explicitly model what is expected to be accomplished with this sheet.
Guided Practice
Teacher will get the students started by projecting one of the students paper on
the white board. You could also use a prior paper as an example. Teacher will
practice editing marks with students.
Teacher will ask students question about the paper they are practicing on and
editing will continue until students have a firm grasp of the expectation.
Students will edit peers work and turn the paper and edit sheet into the teacher.
Teacher will model what a well written argumentative essay will look like as a
final product as well as the rubric.
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will ask student to jot down their favorite thing about
the process of editing.
90
Lesson Number: 8
Objectives
 Students will develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning,
revising, editing, rewriting.

Students will peer edit other students papers.

Rough draft of essay will be read out loud for second peer review.
Standards
W.9-10.1.C. – Develop claims and counterclaims fairly, supplying evidence for
each claim while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner
that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level and concerns.
W.9-10.3.a. – Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation,
or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a
narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or
events.
W.9-10.5. – Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising,
editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is
most significant for a specific purpose.
Materials
 Printed copy of first draft of essay
 Rubric
Duration
116 minutes are needed
Anticipatory Set:
Teaching:
Input
 Teacher will go over the expectation of the peer editing. The teacher will
explicitly model that the first reader will read completely through their essay.
The second time reading the essay the reader will pause after every
paragraph allowing the second student to give the first student suggestions.
Notes will be taken by the reader on their essay.

Next the second reader will read their essay completely through. The
91
second read through the essay the reader will pause after every paragraph
allowing their peer to give the second student suggestions. The reader on
their essay will take notes as suggestions are given.
Guided Practice
Students will choose a second peer to read their paper aloud to for more
editing. Students will take turns reading their papers aloud and write the
feedback directly on their rough draft. By reading aloud their own work things
will become clearer and more details added. Reading their own work aloud
to classmates and other adults helps the editor with understanding what
revisions need to be made. Have they really conveyed to the reader what
they mean?
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will ask student to jot down their favorite thing
about the process of editing.
92
Lesson Number: 9
Objectives
Students will use technology to type a final draft of their essay and then save it
on My Big Campus or Google Docs.
Standards
W.9-10.5. – Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising,
editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most
significant for a specific purpose.
W.9-10.6. – Use technology, including the internet to produce, publish, and
update individual writing products, taking advantage of technology’s capacity to
link other information and to display information flexibly and dynamically.
Materials
 Editing worksheet
 Original essay
 White paper
 Computers
Duration
116 minutes are needed
Anticipatory Set:
Students will be encourage to complete a revision of their essay paying particular
attention to details such as complete sentences, punctuation and spelling.
Teaching:
Input
Students will be individually working on writing their essay using their resources
such as the articles, revised copy of essay, and editor’s notes, and verbal
feedback given by the second peer.
Students will be reminded on how to save to Google docs or My Big Campus for
further editing of their papers.
Students will print out their final papers to be graded with rubric that is in the
appendix.
93
Guided Practice
 Teacher will be checking in with individual students to check for
understanding of assignment and guide students if they are struggling to
edit their essays. Work one-on-one with those who are.

Students will make the corrections on their essays and print their essays
out to be graded.

Other UDL options for publishing have been included in the scaffolded
lessons under website options.
Closure
Last 5 minutes the teacher will ask questions about the writing process and its
importance to plan, revise, edit and rewrite their essays.
94
Argumentative Writing Prompts
Do You Think Cheating Is Getting
Worse?
How Big a Problem Is Bullying or
Cyberbullying in Your School or
Community?
Do You Think Students Should Be
Allowed to Skip their Senior Year
of High School?
Is a College Education
Necessary?
Should Women Be Allowed to Fight
on Like Men on the Front Lines?
What are the Best Movies You
have Seen in the Last Year?
When Do Pranks Become Bullying?
Should There Be Stricter Rules
On How Coaches Treat Their
Players?
Should Students Be Allowed to
Wear Whatever They Want?
What Is More Important: National
Security or Our Privacy?
Should Juvenile Offenders Receive
Life Sentences?
Is Dating Been Phased Out?
Do Violent Video Games Make
People Violent?
Do You Think a Healthier School
Lunch Program Is Still Possible?
Do TV Shows Like ‘16 and Pregnant’
Discourage Teenage Pregnancy?
What is Better Online Learning or
Face-to-Face Learning?
How Concerned Are You About
Where Your Food Comes From?
Do You Think a Healthier School
Lunch Program Is a Lost Cause?
Should Schools Address Bullying and
Should Bystanders Have to
How Should They Address It?
Intervene When There is Trouble?
Should People Replace Human
Limbs With Technology?
Do You Feel The Web Filters at
School Are Too Restrictive?
Adapted from the NY Times
Should Tablet Computers The
Primary Way Students Learn in
Class?
Are You Concerned About
Climate Change?
95
Transition Phrase Poster/Binder Resource
Relationships
Transitional Phrases
Addition
moreover, likewise, as well as, equally
important, and, in addition to, furthermore
Comparison
in the same way, likewise, also, similarly, , in
similar fashion
Contrast
in spite of, in contrast, yet, on the other hand,
conversely but, however, on the contrary,
nevertheless, on one hand, at the same time,
while this may be true
begin with, simultaneously, currently,
subsequently, after, previously, in the
meantime, immediately, recently, earlier, to
afterward, eventually, later, meanwhile
thus, for example, such as, namely, specifically,
to illustrate, for instance, to illustrate, in
particular
of course, truly, certainly, surely, really, also,
furthermore, above all, in fact, even, indeed, , in
addition
opposite to, adjacent to, above, here, there,
wherever, below, nearby
Time
Example
Emphasis
Place
Cause
on account of, for that reason because, since
Order
next, then, finally, first, second, third
Clarification
that is to say, to explain, to clarify, in other
words
Conclusion
in conclude or to conclusion
Effect
thus, hence, so, as a result, therefore,
consequently, accordingly
Adapted from Honigsfeld and Dove (2013)
96
Reference Sheet
Argument Writing
Purpose
Inform an audience that
your viewpoint deserves
consideration.
Strategy
Present information on
both sides of the issue to
show that one idea is more
legitimate than another.
Phrases
The boys claimed…
Despite the fact that…
Style
Logical
Detached
Professional
Essential Elements
Use sound reasoning and
solid evidence by stating
facts, giving logical
reasons, using examples,
and quoting experts.
Reference Sheet
Informative/Explanatory
Writing
Purpose
Inform an audience what
you already know from
primary and secondary
sources by incorporate
relevant examples, facts,
and details.
Strategy
Present information by
explaining a procedure, or
summarizing a concept in
depth.
Phrases
You can help by…
Then you would…
Next, you put…
Style
Passionate
Personal
Emotional
Essential Elements
Must increase the reader’s
knowledge, to help the
reader better understand
a procedure or process, or
to increase comprehension
of a concept.
Argument Graphic
Organizer
97
What is your claim?
Support claim with several reasons with evidence from
credible sources.
Reason 1
EVIDENCE FOR 1ST
POINT
Reason 2
Reason 3
EVIDENCE FOR 2nd
EVIDENCE FOR 3rd
What is
the other
side of
the
argument?
Counterclaim
Concluding statement that supports your argument.
98
Argumentative Foldable #1
What is the major claim?
Reason #1
Evidence
Explain the quote
Reason #2
Evidence
Explain the quote
Reason #3
Evidence
Explain the quote
Counterclaim
Concluding statement that supports the argument.
Adapted from Honigsfeld and Dove (2013)
99
Argumentative Foldable #2
What is the claim?
What is your position on the claim?
Write a quote.
Explain the quote. What does it mean? What does it imply?
What is your position on the claim?
Write a quote.
Explain the quote. What does it mean? What does it imply?
What is your position on the claim?
Write a quote.
Explain the quote. What does it mean? What does it imply?
One or two reason why you could be against the claim
Strong statement as to why your claim is right.
Adapted from Honigsfeld and Dove (2013)
100
Argumentative Foldable Bottom
101
Vocabulary Grid
Word
Meaning
Picture
Sentence
102
Summary Sheet
After the reading and marking up the article, complete the following sheet.
Writing prompt: ___________________________________________
Step One: Developing a claim
In _____________________________________________________
Title of the article in quotes, capitalize all words over five letters long, and all
Nouns and verbs.
From ______________________________________________________________,
Source from name of magazine, newspaper, etc.
________________________
Author
_____________________
Verb, for example: explain,
argue, discuss, assert claim,
insist, recommend.
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Topic (In general - what is the article about)
Step Two: Briefly list three central ideas from the article.
Idea One _______________________________________________
Idea Two _______________________________________________
Idea Three _____________________________________________
Adapted from Collins Education Associates (2012)
103
Transitional Words and Phrases
Argument Chart
To Clarify Words: course, specifically, surely,
usually, after all, as can be expected, clearly,
generally, markedly, namely, naturally, obviously, of
To Show Relationship: as for, by the same token,
identically, in comparison, in the same way,
moreover, comparatively, correspondingly,
with reference to, coupled with, equally, likewise,
similarly, still, together with, with regard to,
Counterpoints: alternatively, another possibility,
aside, instead, nevertheless, other than, on one
hand, on the from, barring, beside, but, other hand,
on the contrary, rather, save, still yet, conversely,
except, excluding, exclusive of, even though, hence,
however, in contrast,
To Link Words: also, thus, turning to, and, as an
example, as an for instance, in addition, in contrast,
in the same way, illustration, as far as, furthermore,
for example, moreover, next, not only…but, also,
now, similarly, so, to
104
Peer Review Sheet
Evaluation of the Argument
What to look for
Date ____________
Comments
Comments
Introducing Claim

Is the claim clearly
stated?

Who is the audience?

The authority of the
claim has been
established by…
Supporting Claim

Do they have evidence?

Concerns and question
for intended audience
have been addressed?

What is the tone?
Language Power

Questions answered?
These include…

Power verbs and
adjectives are included.
These include…

Unforgettable power
phrase has been
included. It is…
Summing It Up

Claim or position is
clearly presented,
developed, and
supported as shown in
lines (write the lines
down).

Do they have a powerful
conclusion that
reinforces the authority
of the original claim.
What is it?
Adapted from Honigsfeld and Dove (2013)
Additional comments:
Peer Editors Signature _____________________________________
Comments
105
Editing Chart
¶
New Paragraph
⁄
Make It Lowercase
Ξ
Capitalize
sp.
Spelling
^
Insert
˜
Reverse Words or Letters
#
Add a Space
ͦ
Add punctuation, circle and add
punctuation.
106
Writing Rubric
Student Name ________________________
Score
60-69
(1)
70-79
(2)
80-89
(3)
90-100
(4)
Purpose/focus
May be brief,
have major
drifts, confusion
or ambiguous
Clearly focused
claim but
insufficiently
sustained or
claim somewhat
unclear
Claim is clear
but materials
loosely related,
context for
claim is
inadequate
Organization
Few or no
transitional
strategies are
used and
frequent
extraneous ideas
Adequate use of
transitions,
ideas
introduction and
conclusion
Elaboration of
Evidence
Use of evidence
from sources is
minimal, absent,
or irrelevant
Language and
Vocabulary
Limited language
of academic
vocabulary and
little sense of
audience and
purpose
Errors are
frequent and
severe and
meaning is
obscured
Inconsistent use
of basic
transitions,
ideas,
introduction and
conclusion is
weak
Evidence
sources are
weak and
citations are
uneven if
present, weak or
uneven
elaboration
techniques
Specific
vocabulary
inappropriate
for purpose and
audience
Claim is clearly
communicated
through out
paper and
alternate
claims are
addressed
Effective
transitions,
logical order,
introduction,
and conclusion
Frequent errors
in usage,
punctuation,
capitalization
and spelling
Conventions
Adapted from Smarter Balance Rubric
Teacher Notes:
Evidence is
integrated
through
citations but
general or
imprecise.
Use of
evidence,
integrated and
concrete and
use of
elaborative
techniques
Specific
vocabulary
generally
appropriate
Academic
vocabulary is
used to
address
purpose
Some errors in
usage, sentence
formation,
punctuation,
capitalization
and spelling.
Few errors,
effective use
of punctuation,
capitalization,
and spelling
107
Website References
Website
Address
Cost
TED-Ed:
Lessons
Worth
Sharing
Share My
Lesson
http://ed.ted.com/
Free
http://www.sharemylesson.com/
Free
Khan
Academy
https://www.khanacademy.org
Free
News ELA
http://newsela.com/
Voice
Thread
https://voicethread.com
Free – Sign
up as a
teacher
$79 yearly
Glogster
http://www.glogster.com/
Free
Live Binder
www.livebinders.com
Free
Prezi
http://prezi.com/pricing-5/edu/
Free
Google
Docs
http://www.gcflearnfree.org/google
Free
documents
How Stuff
Works
(Science)
UDIO
http://www.howstuffworks.com/
Free
https://udio.cast.org/landing
Available
soon
Book Share
www.bookshare.org
Free
Book Builder http://bookbuilder.cast.org/
Free
108
Project References
Alibali, M. (2006). Does visual scaffolding facilitate students’ mathematics
learning? Retrieved from
http://ies.ed.gov/funding/grantsearch/details.asp?ID=54
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2011). UDL research evidence.
Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/research/researchevidence
Collins Education Associates. (2012). 10% focus sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.collinsed.com/PDFs/10_summary_focus_sheet_TSAT.pdf
Di Tommaso, K. (2005). Attention deficits in college transition students. Retrieved
from http://www.worlded.org/WEIInternet/inc/common/_download_
pub.cfm?id=13862&lid
Graham, S. (2008). Effective writing instruction for all students. Retrieved from
http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004250923GJCF33.pdf
Hallowell, E.M., & Ratey, J.J. (1994). Driven to distraction: Recognition and
coping the attention deficit disorder from childhood through adulthood.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
Hitchcock, C., & Stahl, S. (2003). Assistive technology, universal design,
universal design universal design for learning: Improved learning
opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(A). Retrieved
from set.unlv.edu/18.4T/Hitchcock/first.html
Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional
approaches and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books
Honigsfeld, A., & Dove, M. (2013). Common core for the not-so-common learner.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Oliver, C., Hecker, L., Klucken, J., & Westby, C. (2000). Language: The
embedded curriculum in postsecondary education. Topics in Language
Disorders, 21(1),15-29.
Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). The universally designed classroom: Accessible
curriculum and digital technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press.
109
Schwiebert, V.L, Sealander, K.A, & Dennison, J.L. (2002). Strategies for
counselors working with high school students with attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Counseling and Development,
80(1), 1- 18.
Villa, R., Thousand, J., Liston, A., & Nevin, A. (2005). Successful inclusive
practices in middle school and secondary schools. Retrieved from
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/csl9/426/Villa__Successful_inclusive_practices_in_
middle_and_secondary_schools_PDF.pdf
Willis, C., Hoben, S., & Myette, P. (1995). Devising a supportive climate based
on clinical vignettes of college students with attention deficit disorder. The
Association on Higher Education and Disability-Journal of Postsecondary
Learning Disability, 11(2-3), 1-33.
110
References
Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research in direct instruction: 25 years beyond
DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement System.
Aud, S., Kristapovich, P., Rathbun, A., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., & Zhang, J.
(2013). The condition of education 2013. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. (2006). Reading next—a vision for action and research in
middle and high school literacy: A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Washington, D.C.: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Boone, R., & Higgins, K. (2007). New directions in research: The role of instructional
design in assistive technology research and development. Reading Research
Quarterly, 42(1), 135-140.
Bulgren, J., Sampson-Graner, P., & Deshler, D. (2013). Literacy challenges and
opportunities for students with learning disabilities in social studies and history.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 17-27.
California Department of Education. (2013). California Common Core Standards.
Retrieved From
http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/finalelaccssstandards.pdf
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2011). UDL research evidence. Retrieved from
http://www.udlcenter.org/research/researchevidence
111
Chowning, J., Griswold, J., Kovarik, D., & Collins, L. (2012). Fostering critical thinking,
reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education. Plos ONE, 7(5),
1-8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036791
Collins Education Associates. (2012). 10% focus sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.collinsed.com/PDFs/10_summary_focus_sheet_TSAT.pdf
Common Core State Standards. (2013). English language arts & literacy in
history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/finalelaccssstandards.pdf
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Preparing America's students for
college and career. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf
Council for Exceptional Children. (2005). Universal Design for Learning: A guide for
teachers and education professionals. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional
Children.
DiCecco, V., & Gleason, M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational
knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306–
331.
Englert, C., Wu, X., & Zhao, Y. (2005). Cognitive tools for writing: Scaffolding the
performance of students through technology. Learning Disabilities Research &
Practice, 20(3), 184-198. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00132.x
Graham, S. (2008). Effective writing instruction for all students. Retrieved from
http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004250923GJCF33.pdf
112
Graham, S., Collins, A., & Rigby-Wills, H. (2013). Writing characteristics of students
with LD: A meta-analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Arizona State University,
Phoenix, AZ.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2013). Common Core State Standards, writing, and students
with LD: Recommendations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1),
28-37. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12004
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective writing strategies to improve
writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Retrieved from
https://www.baruch.cuny.edu/spa/researchcenters/documents/WritingNext.pdf
Guthrie, J., & Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading engagement: Motivating reader through
integrated instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Hall, T. (2002). Explicit instruction. Retrieved from
http://aim.cast.org/learn/historyarchive/backgroundpapers/explicit_instruction#.U
1NNXKKvlTY
Harris, K., Graham, S., MacArthur, C., Reid, R., & Mason, L. (2011). Self-regulated
learning processes and children’s writing. B. Zimmerman & D.H. Schunk (Eds.),
Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 187–202).
Hart, P. (2005). Rising to the challenge: Are high school graduates prepared for college
and work? Retrieved from http://www.achieve.org/files/pollreport_0.pdf
Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to
the general curriculum: Universal Design for Learning. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 35(2), 8-17.
113
Honigsfeld, A., & Dove, M. (2013). Common core for the not-so-common learner.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Horn, M., & Evans, M. (2013). New schools and innovative delivery. Retrieved from
http://www.aei.org/files/2013/05/29/-hornevans-new-schools-and-innovativedelivery_163046841296.pdf
Hunter, M., & Russell, D. (1994). Planning for effective instruction: Lesson design. In M.
Hunter (Ed.), Enhancing teaching (pp. 87–95).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 2004, P.L. N0. 108-446, 118
Stat. 2647. (2004). (amending 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.).
Kiuhura, S., O’Neill, R., Hawken, L., & Graham, S. (2012). The effectiveness of teaching
10th-grade students STOP, AIMS, and DARE for planning and drafting
persuasive text. Exceptional Children, 78(3), 335-355.
Learning Disabilities Association of America. (2014). Symptoms of learning disabilities.
Retrieved from http://ldaamerica.org/symptoms-of-learning-disabilities/
Lin, T., Hsu, Y., Lin, S., Changlai, M., Yang, K., & Lai, T. (2012). A review of empirical
evidence on scaffolding for science education. International Journal Of Science
& Mathematics Education, 10(2), 437-455.
Macarthur, C. A., & Philippakos, Z. A. (2013). Self-regulated strategy instruction in
developmental writing: A design research project. Community College Review,
41(2), 176-195. doi:10.1177/0091552113484580
114
Melzer, D. (2009). Writing assignments across the curriculum: A national study of
college writing. Retrieved from
http://faculty.salisbury.edu/~tamoriarty/compresearch/meltzer/ccc0612writing%5
B1%5D.pdf
Michael, M., & Trezek, B. (2006). Universal design and multiple literacies: Creating
access and ownership for students with disabilities. Theory Into Practice, 45(4),
311-318. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4504_4
Monte-Sano, C. (2008). Qualities of historical writing instruction: A comparative case
study of two teachers' practices. American Educational Research Journal, 45(4),
1045-1079.
Moss, B. & Bordelon, S. (2007). Preparing students for college-level reading and writing:
implementing a rhetoric and writing class in the senior year. Reading Research
and Instruction, 46(3), 197-218.
National Assessment of Educational Progress (2002). The condition of education.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003521
National Assessment of Educational Progress (2012). The condition of education.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012470
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2014a). What are learning disabilities.
Retrieved from http://www.ncld.org/types-learning-disabilities/what-is-ld/whatare-learning-disabilities
115
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2014b). Teaching expressive writing to
student with LD. Retrieved from http://www.ncld.org/students-disabilities/ldeducation-teachers/teaching-expressive-writing-students-with-ld
National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities. (2014). Contents of the
IEP: Annual goals. Retrieved from
http://nichcy.org/schoolage/iep/iepcontents/goals
Newell, G., Beach, R., Smith, J., VanDerHeide, J., Kuhn, D. & Andriessen, J. (2011).
Teaching and learning argumentative reading and writing: A review of research.
Reading Research Quarterly, 46(3), 273-304.
Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). The universally designed classroom: Accessible
curriculum and digital technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Snow, C., Porche, M., Tabors, P., & Harris, S. (2007). Is literacy enough? Pathways to
academic success for adolescents. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Straub, C., & Alias, A. (2013). Next generation writing at the secondary level for students
with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46(1), 16-24.
Student Achievement Partners. (2012). Common core shifts: A 2-page summary.
Retrieved from
http://www.achlevethecore.org/downloads/E0702_Description_of_the_Common_
Core_Shifts.pdf
116
Thompson, S., Morse, A., Sharpe, M., & Hall, S. (2005). Accommodations manuel: How
to select, administer, and evaluate use of accommodations for instruction and
assessment of students with disabilities. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2005/Accommodations_Manual_How_2005.
pdf
United States Department of Education. (2014). Building the legacy: IDEA 2004.
Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,statute,I,B,612,a,5
Villa, R., Thousand, J., Liston, A., & Nevin, A. (2005). Successful inclusive practices in
middle school and secondary schools. Retrieved from
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/csl9/426/Villa__Successful_inclusive_practices_in_middle
_and_secondary_schools_PDF.pdf
Wallace, G. W., & Bott, D. A. (1989). Statement-pie: A strategy to improve the
paragraph writing skills of adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal Of
Learning Disabilities, 22(9), 541-43,553.
Walker, B. D., Shippen, M. E., Houchins, D. E., & Cihak, D. F. (2007). Improving the
writing skills of high school students with learning disabilities using the
"expressive writing" program. International Journal Of Special Education, 22(2),
66-76.
Wehmeyer, M. (2006). Beyond access: Ensuring progress in the general education
curriculum for students with severe disabilities. Research and Practice for
Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(4), 322-326.