About the Author: Dr. Susan Warmuth teaches special needs students at Theodore F. Riggs High School in Pierre, South Dakota. She can be reached at warmuths@pierre.k12.sd.us.

Writing has become a focal point for school improvement across the country. As a key component in the improvement process, teachers are looking for interventions that improve the writing skills of all students. One of the most difficult areas in writing improvement has been in working with students with special needs. Englert, Raphael, Anderson, Anthony, and Stevens (1991) wrote, "Students with learning disabilities experience the most serious deficits in the area of written language" (p. 98), and this view is reflected in a review of the literature. The question this raises is how do we help these students improve their writing?

There have been a variety of suggestions for improving the writing skills of special needs students over the last 10 years. Troia, Graham, and Harris (1999) contend the best way to improve writing for special needs students is to teach them meaningful ways to plan for their writing. Streur (1999) wrote, "Whether your goal is to motivate students to write prose or poetry, generating meaningful topics to develop into stories and poems is the foundation of a successful writing program" (p. 78). Rief (1992) indicated that she first asks students to think in terms of what they know and to decide what they want to know about the topic of their choice. Atwell (1998) seems to suggest that writing is more of a developmental process that, when learned through a systematic approach, encourages students to reach out and become more creative. Teaching students the "writing process" came out of the whole language movement. Researchers have identified different forms that writing instruction can take, and the question for the classroom teacher is which way is the most effective. Some of the research points to the possibility that it isn’t necessarily the method that is used, but rather how well the strategy is used and modeled by the teachers (MacArthur, 1998; Berninger, Abbott, Whittaker, Sylvester, and Nolan, 1995; Englert, Garmon, Mariage, Rozendal, Tarrant, and Urba, 1995; MacArthur, Graham, Schwartz, and Schafer, 1995; Englert, Raphael, Anderson, Anthony, and Stevens, 1991).

The following strategies are intended to provide classroom teachers with some options that seem to enhance writing for all students, but they also provide special needs students with the structure they need to be successful as well. When working with special needs students, it is important to remember that the teacher should model the presentation of information many times in a consistent manner. Each step of whatever process the teacher uses should be clear and well organized. It needs to be presented in a multi-modal format that allows students to see what the teacher is doing, hear what the teacher is saying, and do what the teacher is doing. Most teachers currently use some form of the "writing process" that includes prewriting activities (brainstorming, mapping, or graphic planners), creating a draft, reviewing and revising, editing for polish, proofreading, and preparing a final copy. Researchers suggest that what works best is teaching students strategies they can use in each phase of the writing process. For most special needs students, working in conjunction with others through the initial writing instruction enhances their understanding of the processes as they are taught. That is not to suggest in any way that the expectations for special needs students be lowered, but rather geared for their ability. Writing tends to be a very personal activity whether the writer is five years old or 105. By collaborating in the process and sharing the experience of writing, students seem to gain a better understanding of the elements of writing. If we ask students to do a writing project, teachers need to demonstrate their expectations of the project by first doing a collaborative, group demonstration. This means that each time a writing assignment is given, teachers would teach the skills that the students will be asked to use.

Prewriting activities set the stage for the writing assignments. In the prewriting stage, Troia et al. (1999) noted that planning becomes an integral part of determining the piece the student will write. Special needs students often struggle with the process of brainstorming ideas. They need guidance in terms of the style of the assignment, whether it is descriptive, narrative, comparative, or expository. Each of these areas has conventions that are unique to that style. Modeling by the teacher helps students follow the steps they need to take to begin individual projects. As the teacher is modeling the steps, it enhances the learning of students to hear what the teacher is thinking while writing down the information. Some teachers use the overhead projector to demonstrate what they are writing while others use the board or PowerPoint presentations to demonstrate the steps they take. In the first stages of teaching a skill, students need to see and hear every thought and word as the teacher develops the scaffold or framework that the teacher is using to brainstorm or plan what they are going to write. One issue dealt with early on in writing instruction is to de-emphasize quantity in favor of quality. A well-written sentence leads to well-written paragraphs and eventually well-written pages.

Englert et al. (1991) suggest that internal discussions by mature writers occur throughout their work. Writers like to discuss their works in progress; it helps them to put their thoughts in order. These authors contend that "good strategy instruction in writing emphasizes social speech and conversation among teachers and students in the context of composing text" (p. 339). Social dialogue on a consistent basis becomes internalized and helps students direct their own work as they progress through the writing process.

Prewriting activities include considering the purpose of the writing, planning the style the author will use, and determining where information might be located. When the teacher models the process for students, study guides and tip sheets provide reminders of expectations during this phase of the process. The tip sheets help students by serving as a checklist to determine if they have followed the plan they designed before writing. Troia et al. (1999) identify three strategies to be used in the planning stages: setting goals for their writing, brainstorming ideas related to a topic, and then sequencing those ideas. They contend that by teaching each strategy, students become more adept at writing. Most of the interventions and strategies were targeted to the prewriting areas. Learning the strategies the individual writer will use increases the writer’s ability to communicate thoughts and ideas.

Drafting the article, story, or piece is the next step in writing. During this phase, emphasis is placed on having students put their thoughts and ideas down in a sequential manner. The emphasis is usually on content at this point rather than quality. Although some concerns have been raised about the use of inventive spelling, the intent of this phase is to begin the actual writing or typing of words on paper. During revising and reviewing, the student is asked if the sentences make sense together. Do they relate to each other? Does each paragraph have a main idea that is clear and easy to understand? Does the paragraph include supporting information, details, and facts that relate to the main idea? The revising and reviewing stage again needs to be modeled for students. Students need to look at the relationship between each sentence and begin to hear the voice and sounds of the words they are using. The correction of grammar begins in this phase but is not necessarily the main focus. This phase provides the students the opportunity to address structural and content issues. Students become, in essence, the audience for their own work and begin to view the writing as a reader would. They spend time asking, "Does this sound right?" "Do these things work together or is there a better way to say what I want to say?"

In the editing phase students consider specific grammatical rules and whether they have followed them. Using the computer is a means to enhance this phase of the process; but MacArthur (1998) notes in his article that students should first be instructed in the applications that the word processing package has to offer the student. The teacher needs to take time to teach the students the ways in which the word processing software can assist them and where they must rely on their own ability or other sources of information. He also draws attention to the fact that in some cases the transcription process may draw the students’ attention away from content to focus on how they are transcribing it into the computer. He suggests using a word prediction program to assist students and a speech synthesis program that allows the student to say the word as the computer responds to the sounds the students say. Ashton (1999) suggests using the CHECK method as a way to encourage students to utilize the spellcheck software more effectively. CHECK stands for

Check the beginning sound of a word.

Hunt for the correct consonants.

Examine the vowels.

Changes may give the writer hints.

Keep repeating steps 1-4 until you find the correct word.

By having a step-by-step process to use the software, students are relieved of the anxiety of trying to remember the steps they must use to figure out words they don’t know how to spell (p. 24).

The final editing leads to the student’s finished product. It is beneficial for the students to know how that product is going to be used and what form the product will take. Publishing the writing even within the classroom gives the students more motivation to write. As with everything we ask of students, if they see an authentic purpose behind their work, they become more involved in the completion of the work.

Writing is a difficult task for students. When provided with the tools, strategies, and models, writing becomes a meaningful task for students. Special needs students benefit from this instruction and begin to build their skills. Key components within any writing program include the consistency with which the skills are taught and the modeling provided by the teacher in large groups, in smaller collaborative groups, and through individual discussions with students. When all the components are in place, student writing has demonstrated improvement both on informal assessments and through more formalized testing. It is most important that writing be viewed as an adventure for students. It is a way to express their thought, ideas, and creative energy. Streur (1999) wrote, "Less is more" (p. 78). She suggests that by freeing the students from worry about how much to write, they will write more. As with anything, the more a person does something the easier it becomes. This is true for special needs students as well. They need to be exposed to writing and how to write in every class they take; and, they need to be given the techniques, strategies, and guides that will allow them to be successful when they do write. It is important to remember writing is not something we do just in the English classroom. Writing is something we do in all classes and in every part of our day. By having the tools modeled, being able to use self-talk to guide themselves through the process, and having an established process to follow for each genre, students will eventually experiment with writing in other forms and ways. There is a sense of excitement and accomplishment in the air when the writing is completed successfully, especially for special needs students because they see that they can write just like everyone else.

References

Ashton, T. M. (1999). Spell checking: Making writing meaningful in the inclusive classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children 32(2). 24-27.

Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understanding about writing, reading, and learning (2^nd ed.). New Hampshire: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Whittaker, D., Sylvester, L. & Nolan, S. B. (1995). Integrating low and high-level skills in instructional protocols for writing disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly; 18(4). 293-309.

Englert, C. S., Garmon, A., Mariage, T., Rozendal, M., Tarrant, K., & Urba, J. (1995). The early literacy project: Connecting across the literacy curriculum. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 18(4). 253-275.

Englert, C. S., Raphael, T. E., Anderson, L. M., Anthony, H. M., & Stevens, D. D. (1991). Making strategies and self-talk visible: Writing instruction in regular and special education classrooms. American Educational Research Journal 28(2). 337-372.

MacArthur, C. A. (1998). Word processing with speech synthesis and word prediction: Effects on the dialogue journal writing of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 21(2). 151-166.

MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., Schwartz, S. S., & Schafer, W. D. (1995). Evaluation of a writing instruction model that integrated a process approach, strategy instruction, and word processing. Learning Disabilities Quarterly 18(4). 278-291.

Rief, L. (1992). Seeking Diversity: Language Arts with Adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Streur, C. (1999). Creating prolific writers. Teaching Pre K-8 30(1). 78.

Troia, G. A., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1999). Teaching students with learning disabilities to mindfully plan when writing. Exceptional Children 65(2). 235-252.