The Not-So-Simple View of Writing in Struggling Readers/Writers

Abstract

Research suggests that executive function, motivation, transcription, and composition processes are implicated in the writing quality and productivity of children with and without learning difficulties. However, numerous components embedded within these constructs create both conceptual and empirical challenges to the study of written expression. These challenges are reflected in the writing research by way of poor delineation of constructs and insufficient distinction among domain general resources (e.g. working memory) versus processes related to the academic domain of writing (e.g. pre-planning), as well as among lower- (e.g. handwriting) and higher-order (e.g. editing) writing-specific processes. The current study utilizes the Not-so-Simple View of Writing (NSVW) as an organizing framework for examining the relations among multiple components, correlates, and attributes of writing in a sample of struggling readers/writers (n = 402) in grades 3-5. Data were collected on measures of (a) handwriting, spelling, planning, revision, and editing, derived from the Test of Oral Written Language (TOWL-4), (b) executive function derived from the NIH Examiner, and (c) motivation/self-efficacy derived from the Student Contextual Learning Scale. Structural equation modeling was utilized to test direct and indirect relations in the NSVW model. Results showed generally moderate correlations among observed/latent variables and found support for relations among writing-specific processes. Domain-general resources (executive function and motivation/self-efficacy) were related to spelling directly and indirectly to writing. Domain-specific processes (handwriting, spelling, planning, editing, and revision) were related to writing. The results have implications for explicit instruction of writing processes and for future research on empirical models.

Figure 1.

Schematic of the Not-so-Simple View of Writing as a theoretical model. From Berninger and Winn (2006, p. 97). Copyright © 2006 The Guilford Press. Reprinted by permission. ^aActivates long-term memory during planning, composing, reviewing, revising, and short-term memory during reviewing and revising output. ^bComponents include (1) orthographic, phonological, and morphological storage units for verbal information, (2) a phonological loop for learning words and maintaining verbal information actively in working memory, and (3) executive supports that link verbal working memory with the general executive system (a distributed network of many executive functions) and with nonverbal working memory (which stores information in a visual-spatial sketchpad). ^cA complex system that regulates focused attention – selecting what is relevant and inhibiting what is not relevant, switching attention between mental sets, attention maintenance (staying on task), conscious attention, (metalinguistic and metacognitive awareness), cognitive presence, and cognitive engagement.

Figure 2.

Schematic of the Not-so-Simple View of Writing (NSVW) as an empirical model. Note. %WSC: % words spelled correctly; CC: cognitive control; FL: fluency; Strat: learning strategies; TOWL: Test of Written Language; WJ-III: Woodcock Johnson-III; WM: working memory.

Figure 3.

Standardized results for the full model. Note. %WSC: words spelled correctly; CC: cognitive control; FL: fluency; Strat: learning strategies; TOWL: Test of Written Language; WJ-III: Woodcock Johnson-III; WM: working memory. ^aHandwriting to planning; ^bhandwriting to editing; ^cplanning to editing; ^dspelling to planning; ^eplanning to revision; ^fspelling to revision. Solid lines represent significant direct effects or correlations; dashed lines represent non-significant direct effects or correlations. Parameter estimates are shown for direct effects only.