Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language- learning disabilities

Anthony D. Koutsoftas, Shelley Gray

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    23 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Purpose: Students with language-learning disabilities (LLD) demonstrate difficulties with written language, especially in the areas of productivity, complexity, and grammar. It is not clear how these deficits affect their performance on high-stakes tests, such as those required by the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This study used writing samples to compare how students with and without LLD scored on analytic writing measures that are typically used in writing research and on a more holistic measure of writing, the six-traits writing rubric (STWR; Education Northwest, 2006), which is used in high-stakes writing assessments. Method: Fifty-six 4th and 5th graders with typical development (TD) or LLD produced 1 narrative and 1 expository writing sample. Measures of oral language ability and handwriting accuracy-speed were also obtained. The narrative and expository samples were scored using 5-6 separate analytic measures and 6 separate traits on the STWR. Results: On narratives, the TD group scored significantly higher than the LLD group on 5 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Similarly, for expository, the TD group outscored the LLD group on 3 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Results demonstrate that the analytic scores of productivity, sentence complexity, and lexical diversity were correlated significantly with a higher overall score on the STWR for narrative writing samples only. Discussion: Results of this study suggest that exclusive use of analytic scores to select treatment goals and document writing progress may not translate into increased scores on writing rubrics, particularly for expository writing samples.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)395-409
    Number of pages15
    JournalLanguage, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
    Volume43
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Oct 1 2012

    Fingerprint

    Learning Disorders
    learning disability
    Language
    Students
    narrative
    language
    student
    Language-learning Disabilities
    Expository Writing
    Group
    productivity
    Handwriting
    Efficiency
    Education
    Language Development
    handwriting
    Aptitude
    written language
    grammar
    education

    Keywords

    • Children
    • High-stakes testing
    • Holistic rubrics
    • Language-learning disabled
    • Written language

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Linguistics and Language
    • Speech and Hearing
    • Language and Linguistics

    Cite this

    Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language- learning disabilities. / Koutsoftas, Anthony D.; Gray, Shelley.

    In: Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 43, No. 4, 01.10.2012, p. 395-409.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{33a845e0079c43c5b247c3883664d536,
    title = "Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language- learning disabilities",
    abstract = "Purpose: Students with language-learning disabilities (LLD) demonstrate difficulties with written language, especially in the areas of productivity, complexity, and grammar. It is not clear how these deficits affect their performance on high-stakes tests, such as those required by the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This study used writing samples to compare how students with and without LLD scored on analytic writing measures that are typically used in writing research and on a more holistic measure of writing, the six-traits writing rubric (STWR; Education Northwest, 2006), which is used in high-stakes writing assessments. Method: Fifty-six 4th and 5th graders with typical development (TD) or LLD produced 1 narrative and 1 expository writing sample. Measures of oral language ability and handwriting accuracy-speed were also obtained. The narrative and expository samples were scored using 5-6 separate analytic measures and 6 separate traits on the STWR. Results: On narratives, the TD group scored significantly higher than the LLD group on 5 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Similarly, for expository, the TD group outscored the LLD group on 3 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Results demonstrate that the analytic scores of productivity, sentence complexity, and lexical diversity were correlated significantly with a higher overall score on the STWR for narrative writing samples only. Discussion: Results of this study suggest that exclusive use of analytic scores to select treatment goals and document writing progress may not translate into increased scores on writing rubrics, particularly for expository writing samples.",
    keywords = "Children, High-stakes testing, Holistic rubrics, Language-learning disabled, Written language",
    author = "Koutsoftas, {Anthony D.} and Shelley Gray",
    year = "2012",
    month = "10",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0018)",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "43",
    pages = "395--409",
    journal = "Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools",
    issn = "0161-1461",
    publisher = "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)",
    number = "4",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Comparison of narrative and expository writing in students with and without language- learning disabilities

    AU - Koutsoftas, Anthony D.

    AU - Gray, Shelley

    PY - 2012/10/1

    Y1 - 2012/10/1

    N2 - Purpose: Students with language-learning disabilities (LLD) demonstrate difficulties with written language, especially in the areas of productivity, complexity, and grammar. It is not clear how these deficits affect their performance on high-stakes tests, such as those required by the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This study used writing samples to compare how students with and without LLD scored on analytic writing measures that are typically used in writing research and on a more holistic measure of writing, the six-traits writing rubric (STWR; Education Northwest, 2006), which is used in high-stakes writing assessments. Method: Fifty-six 4th and 5th graders with typical development (TD) or LLD produced 1 narrative and 1 expository writing sample. Measures of oral language ability and handwriting accuracy-speed were also obtained. The narrative and expository samples were scored using 5-6 separate analytic measures and 6 separate traits on the STWR. Results: On narratives, the TD group scored significantly higher than the LLD group on 5 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Similarly, for expository, the TD group outscored the LLD group on 3 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Results demonstrate that the analytic scores of productivity, sentence complexity, and lexical diversity were correlated significantly with a higher overall score on the STWR for narrative writing samples only. Discussion: Results of this study suggest that exclusive use of analytic scores to select treatment goals and document writing progress may not translate into increased scores on writing rubrics, particularly for expository writing samples.

    AB - Purpose: Students with language-learning disabilities (LLD) demonstrate difficulties with written language, especially in the areas of productivity, complexity, and grammar. It is not clear how these deficits affect their performance on high-stakes tests, such as those required by the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This study used writing samples to compare how students with and without LLD scored on analytic writing measures that are typically used in writing research and on a more holistic measure of writing, the six-traits writing rubric (STWR; Education Northwest, 2006), which is used in high-stakes writing assessments. Method: Fifty-six 4th and 5th graders with typical development (TD) or LLD produced 1 narrative and 1 expository writing sample. Measures of oral language ability and handwriting accuracy-speed were also obtained. The narrative and expository samples were scored using 5-6 separate analytic measures and 6 separate traits on the STWR. Results: On narratives, the TD group scored significantly higher than the LLD group on 5 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Similarly, for expository, the TD group outscored the LLD group on 3 analytic measures and all 6 traits. Results demonstrate that the analytic scores of productivity, sentence complexity, and lexical diversity were correlated significantly with a higher overall score on the STWR for narrative writing samples only. Discussion: Results of this study suggest that exclusive use of analytic scores to select treatment goals and document writing progress may not translate into increased scores on writing rubrics, particularly for expository writing samples.

    KW - Children

    KW - High-stakes testing

    KW - Holistic rubrics

    KW - Language-learning disabled

    KW - Written language

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867497766&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867497766&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0018)

    DO - 10.1044/0161-1461(2012/11-0018)

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 22411493

    AN - SCOPUS:84867497766

    VL - 43

    SP - 395

    EP - 409

    JO - Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools

    JF - Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools

    SN - 0161-1461

    IS - 4

    ER -