interactive – Strategic & Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI)

Adapted for deaf students, “Morning Message” helps build writing skills

Wolbers, K. & Miller, J. (2008). Adapted for deaf students, “Morning Message” helps build writing skills. Odyssey, 9(1), 42-45.

Tags: apprenticeship, interactive

One of the greatest challenges teachers of deaf students face is how to teach students to write effectively. Teachers want them to plan, organize, and relay meaning in a coherent way, but teachers also expect them to develop a sense of control over English writing conventions and mechanics. It is probably no surprise that teachers are constantly looking for and testing the kinds of instruction that succeed in teaching these writing skills to students who are deaf or hard of hearing. In this article, the authors discuss an instructional approach, called “Morning Message” by the teachers who use it at Michigan State University, as a guided interactive writing activity. Since the authors learned about Morning Message, they have focused their efforts on adapting this activity to better accommodate the specific needs of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The authors discuss how Morning Message helps build writing skills and benefits deaf students.

Read in Full

Dissertations

Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI): Apprenticing deaf students in the construction of informative text

Wolbers, K. (2007). Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI): Apprenticing deaf students in the construction of informative text. Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Tags: apprenticeship, efficacy study, fluency/length, interactive, language delay/deprivation, linguistic/metalinguistic, revision, strategic, word identification, writing, written language

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of writing instruction that was strategic and interactive, namely Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI), when utilized with deaf, middle school students. In addition to strategic and interactive instruction, four minor instructional components included: (a) use of writing examples and non-examples; (b) metalinguistic knowledge building; (c) use of visual scaffolds; and (d) NIP-it lessons (i.e., contextualized mini-lessons involving Noticing, Instructing, and Practicing). The study used a non-equivalent, pretest-posttest control group design to explore whether students receiving SIWI made significantly greater gains compared to those not receiving SIWI on a number of writing variables and reading. The participants of the study were two teachers of the deaf and their respective middle school students. There were 33 total students, 16 in the treatment group and 17 in the comparison group. Students, teachers and schools were matched according to several pertinent variables. The SIWI intervention lasted a total of 8 weeks, during which the treatment teacher guided the collaborative construction of two informative papers; the comparison group continued with their usual literacy instruction. All students were given a battery of assessments prior to and after the intervention to evaluate any gains. These measures included (a) an informative writing assessment, (b) an editing and revising task, (c) a generalization writing probe similar to a 7th grade state standardized assessment, and (d) a SORT-R reading test. The first three measures were scored, according to rubrics, for organization, coherence, evidence of text structure, contextual language, and conventions. A second rater scored approximately 10 to 20% of the papers and obtained an interrater reliability of 0.93 to 1.0. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed along with the necessary follow-up univariate analyses. All analyses were statistically significant, finding SIWI to be an effective instructional approach. Furthermore, the effect sizes (d) or the magnitude of the differences between group means for writing variables were large to very large, ranging from 1.27 to 2.65. The effect size for the reading variable was small to moderate at 0.39.

Read in Full

Research Journal Articles

The Language Zone: Differentiating writing instruction for students who are deaf and hard of hearing

Dostal, H., Wolbers, K. & Kilpatrick, J. (2019). The Language Zone: Differentiating writing instruction for students who are deaf and hard of hearing. Writing & Pedagogy, 11(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/wap.30045

Tags: ASL, grammar, interactive, language delay/deprivation, language zone, linguistic/metalinguistic, written language

Interactive Writing is a powerful support for language and literacy development; however, its emphasis on using oral language to construct written language can present challenges for deaf students due to their unique and diverse language experiences. Teachers (n = 14) using Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) in grades 3–5 were observed using a space referred to as ‘the language zone’ (LZ) to address the needs of deaf students. The LZ is a space in a classroom where the creation, translation and revision of ideas is made visible. Researchers developed a flowchart with three tiers to document the purposes for which teachers use the space. Accompanying scenarios provide concrete examples. Teachers can use the LZ flow chart as a tool to recognize, analyze and select instructional moves that may positively impact the language and literacy proficiencies of deaf students.

Read in Full

Research Journal Articles

Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction: An efficacy study in grades 3-5

Wolbers, K., Dostal, H., Graham, S., Branum-Martin, L., Kilpatrick, J., & Saulsburry, R. (2018). Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction: An efficacy study in grades 3-5. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 8(1), 99-117. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v8n1p99

Tags: efficacy study, interactive, linguistic/metalinguistic, strategic, writing, written language

A quasi-experimental study was conducted to examine the impact of Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction on 3rd-5th grade deaf and hard of hearing students’ writing and written language compared to a business-as-usual condition (treatment group N = 41, comparison group N = 22). A total of 18 hours of instruction was provided for each of two types of writing—personal narrative and persuasive. Writing samples, collected prior to instruction and after, were scored for writing traits, written language accuracy, and complexity. Data were analyzed using a two-level, mixed-effects regression. Results show the treatment to be effective for personal narrative and persuasive writing traits, and personal narrative written language variables, with effect sizes ranging from 0.46 to 2.01. Treatment effects were also substantial for persuasive writing written language outcomes (0.38 to 1.06), although not all were statistically significant at the 0.05 level. The findings suggest the importance of apprenticeship in writing and consideration for the specific language needs of students with hearing loss.

Read in Full

ResearchCategory:Research Journal Articles

Practices and Routines In SIWI Lessons That Develop Reading Proficiency For D/HH Learners

Skerrit, P. (2017). Practices and routines in SIWI lessons that develop reading proficiency for d/hh learners. Caribbean Curriculum, 25, 38-52. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v8n1p99

Tags: fingerspelling, interactive, rereading, word identification

The average performance of Deaf and hard of hearing (D/hh) students on tests of reading comprehension is several grade equivalents below their high school hearing peers. This study explored how the reading-writing connection evident in instruction driven with a high fidelity to the principles of Strategic Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) addresses the literacy challenges of D/hh learners. The video footage of SIWI lessons in two grade three classrooms were examined using a comingling of inductive and interpretive analysis and utilizing Spradley’s nine semantic relationships to determine the instructional and learner practices and routines that supported development of word recognition skills. The following instructional and learner practices and routines were identified: engaging students in cognitively demanding discourse that featured extended discourse and persistence in questioning; a high volume of repeated and wide reading; high volume of writing; multiple representation of words with an emphasis on fingerspelling; and attending to language input.

Read in Full

Book Chapters

Interventions for the deaf and language delayed

Wolbers, K. & Dostal, H. (2010). Interventions for the deaf and language delayed. In R. Allington & A. McGill-Franzen (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Disabilities Research (pp. 392-406). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.

Tags: apprenticeship, ASL, interactive, language delay/deprivation, linguistic/metalinguistic, strategic

This chapter provides a synthesis of previous literacy research with deaf students, and it suggests a number of future directions. Much attention throughout the chapter is given to one subpopulation of deaf students—those with severe to profound losses who are less likely to develop oral language skills and who encounter unique barriers to reading and writing development when compared to their hearing or hard of hearing peers. There is a need for specialized literacy instruction of the deaf in order to be responsive to the specific language and literacy challenges they encounter. Two main areas are discussed in this chapter: (1) the occurrence of delays in development of expressive language and (2) the effect of having a visually and spatially-based language as one’s primary mode of communication. Instructional interventions that address these specific challenges and attempt to positively impact reading or writing in English are highlighted throughout.

Research Journal Articles

Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI): Apprenticing deaf students in the construction of English text

Wolbers, K. (2008a). Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI): Apprenticing deaf students in the construction of English text. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 299-326. https://doi.org/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034441

Tags: ASL, bilingual, efficacy study, genre, grammar, interactive, strategic, written language

This study investigates the effects of using Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) with deaf, middle school students who use American Sign Language as their L1 and written English as L2. Using a pretest-posttest control group design, the research explores whether students receiving SIWI made significantly greater gains compared to those not receiving SIWI on a number of variables. There are 33 total students, 16 in the treatment group and 17 in the comparison group. The intervention lasted a total of 8 weeks, during which time the treatment group collaboratively constructed two report papers using SIWI components, and the comparison group continued with their typical literacy instruction. The pre and posttest measures were scored, according to rubrics, for evidence of primary traits, contextual language, and conventions. The multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and follow-up univariate analyses were statistically significant. Furthermore, effect sizes (d) were large to very large, ranging from 1.27 to 2.65, indicating SIWI to be an effective approach with deaf L2 writers.

Read in Full

Research Journal Articles

Using balanced and interactive writing instruction to improve the higher order and lower order writing skills of deaf students

Wolbers, K. (2008b). Using balanced and interactive writing instruction to improve the higher order and lower order writing skills of deaf students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13(2), 255-277. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enm052

Tags: apprenticeship, genre, grammar, interactive, revision, word identification, writing, written language

The current study reports the findings of balanced and interactive writing instruction used with 16 deaf and hard of hearing students. Although the instruction has been used previously, this was the first time it had been modified to suit the specific needs of deaf children and the first time it had been implemented with this subpopulation of students. The intervention took place in two elementary classrooms (N=8) and one middle school classroom (N=8) for a total of 21 days. A comparison of pre and posttest scores on both writing and reading measures evidenced that students made significant gains with use of genre-specific traits, use of contextual language, editing/revising skills, and word identification. Students showed neither gains nor losses with conventions and total word count. In addition, a one-way MANOVA was used to detect any school-level effects. Elementary students made significantly greater gains with respect to conventions and word identification, and middle school students made significantly greater gains with editing and revising tasks.

Read in Full