Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:04:47.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Writing Self-efficacy Changes after Cognitive Strategy Intervention in Students with Learning Disabilities: The Mediational Role of Gender in Calibration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Jesús-Nicasio García  and
Raquel Fidalgo
Jesús-Nicasio García*
Affiliation:
Universidad de León (Spain)
Raquel Fidalgo
Affiliation:
Universidad de León (Spain)
*
Correspondence should be addressed to Jesús-Nicasio García, Departamento de Psicología, Sociología y Filosofía. Área Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación. Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 – León, Spain. Phones: +34-987291041 (university); +34-987222118 (home); +34-652817871 (cell); Fax: +34-987291035 (university). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the mediational role of gender in the effects of two patterns of cognitive and self-regulatory strategy interventions in the writing self-efficacy calibration of students with learning disabilities (LD). 121 5th and 6th Primary grade students with LD (43 girls and 78 boys), ranging in age from 10 to 12 years old were randomly allocated either to one of the experimental intervention groups, (n = 48, 19 girls and 29 boys), and followed a intervention program based on the Self-Regulated Strategy Development Model, or they received training based on the Social Cognitive Model of Sequential Skill Acquisition (n = 31, 15 girls and 26 boys), or alternatively they were allocated to the ordinary instruction group (n = 32, 9 girls and 23 boys). Writing performance was assessed using two types of writing evaluation: a reader-based score concerned with structure, coherence and quality, and a text based score regarding productivity, coherence and structure. Writing self-efficacy beliefs were also assessed using a self-report scale including eight items about the students' confidence in completing a writing task and to gain specific writing skills. The results suggest that the miscalibration of writing self-efficacy in girls with LD was significantly modified to a more realistic calibration of their writing competence after experimental intervention. However, the findings do not confirm the same clear statement for boys.

Este estudio examina el papel mediacional del género en los efectos de dos patrones de intervenciones de estrategias cognitivas y auto-reguladoras en la calibración de la autoeficacia escritora de alumnos con dificultades de aprendizaje (DA). Se asignaron al azar a 121 alumnos de educación primaria de 5⍜ y 6⍜ con DA (43 chicas y 78 chicos), edades entre 10 y 12 años, o a uno de los grupos de intervención experimental (n = 48, 19 chicas y 29 chicos), y recibieron un programa de intervención basado en el modelo de desarrollo de estrategia auto-regulada o un entrenamiento basado en el modelo cognitivo de adquisición secuencial de habilidades (n = 31, 15 chicas y 26 chicos), o alternativamente, fueron asignados a un grupo de instrucción normal (n = 32, 9 chicas y 23 chicos). Se evaluó la ejecución de escritura con dos tipos evaluación: una puntuación basada en el lector, ligada a la estructura, la coherencia y la calidad, y una puntuación basada en el texto, ligada a la productividad, la coherencia y la estructura. Las creencias de autoeficacia sobre la escritura también se evaluaron con una escala de auto-informe que incluía ocho ítems acerca de la confianza de los alumnos al completar una tarea de escritura y al ganar habilidades de escritura específica. Los resultados sugieren que la calibración errónea de la autoeficacia de escritura en chicas con DA se modificó significativamente a una calibración más realista de su competencia en escritura después de la intervención experimental. Sin embargo, los resultados no confirman lo mismo para los chicos.

Keywords

writing self-efficacycalibrationcognitive strategy interventionlearning disabilitiesgender differencesautoeficacia de escrituracalibraciónintervención cognitiva de estrategiadificultades de aprendizajediferencias de género
Type
Articles
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , November 2008 , pp. 414 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175–1184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (Revised). Available from Frank Pajares, Emory University (Atlanta, GA).Google Scholar
Bosque, I., & Demonte, V. (1999). Gramática descriptive de la lengua española. Vol 3: Entre la oración y el discurso. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Butler, D. L. (1995). Promoting strategic learning by postsecondary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 170–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, D. L. (1998a). Meta-cognition and learning disabilities. In Wong, B. Y. L. (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 277–377). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Butler, D. L. (1998b). The strategic content learning approach to promoting self-regulated learning: A report of three studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 682–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, D. L. (1999, April). Identifying and remediating students' inefficient approaches to tasks. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.Google Scholar
Crain, R. M. (1996). The influence, of age, race, and gender on child and adolescent multidimensional self-concept. In Bracken, B. A. (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept: Development, social, and clinical considerations (pp. 395–420). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Harold, R. D., & Blumenfeld, P. B. (1993). Age and gender differences in children's achievement, self-perceptions during the elementary school years. Child Development, 64, 830–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fidalgo, R. (2005). La metacognición en la composición escrita: revisión, medida e instrucción. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of León, Spain.Google Scholar
Fidalgo, R., & García, J. N. (2007). Meta-cognitive strategies to improve the written expression of students with learning disabilities. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Fidalgo, R., Torrance, M., & García, J. N. (in press). The long term effects of writing strategy instruction for young writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology.Google Scholar
García, J. N., & de Caso, A. (2006a). Comparison of the effects on writing attitudes and writing self-efficacy of three different training programs in students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Educational Research, 43, 272–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, J. N., & de Caso, A. (2006b). Changes in writing self-efficacy and writing products and process through specific training in the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A contemporary Journal, 4, 1–27.Google Scholar
García, J. N., & de Caso, A. (2007). Effectiveness of an improvement writing program according to students' reflexivity levels. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, (2). 303–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
García, J. N., & Fidalgo, R. (2006). Effects of two self-regulatory instruction programs in students with learning disabilities in writing products, process and self-efficacy. Learning Disability Quarterly, 29, 181–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, J. N., & Fidalgo, R. (2008). The orchestration of writing processes and writing products: A comparison of learning disabled and non-disabled 6th grade students. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 6, (2). 77–98.Google Scholar
García, J. N., Fidalgo, R., & Arias-Gundín, O. (2006). the state of the art in learning disabilities in Spain. In Sideridis, G. D. & Scanlon, D. (Eds.,), Proceedings of the 14th World Congress on Learning Disabilities. A Multidisciplinary Approach to Learning Disabilities: Integrating Education, Motivation and Emotions (pp. 180–191). Boston: LDWGoogle Scholar
Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: A meta-analysis. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research, (pp. 187–208). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Improving learning disabled students' skills at composing: Self-instructional strategy training. Exceptional Children, 56, 201–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1997). Self-regulation and writing: Where do we go from here? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). New York: Guildford PressGoogle Scholar
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 207–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, S., MacArthur, C., Schwartz, S., & Page-Voth, V. (1992). Improving the compositions of students with learning disabilities using a strategy involving product and process goal setting. Exceptional Children, 58, 322–334CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, S., Schwartz, S., & MacArthur, C. (1993). Learning disabled and normally achieving students' knowledge of writing and the composing process attitude toward writing, and self-efficacy for students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 237–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, M., & Hassan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.Google Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In Levy, C.M. & Ransdell, S. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hidi, S., & Boscolo, P. (2006). Motivation and writing. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research, (pp. 144–157). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Jiménez, J. E., & Hernández, I. (1999). A Spanish perspective in LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 32, 267–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klassen, R. (2002a). A question of calibration: A review of the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 88–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klassen, R. (2002b). Writing in early adolescence: A review of the role of self-efficacy beliefs. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 173–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klassen, R. (2006). Too much confidence? The self-efficacy of adolescents with learning disabilities. In Pajares, F. & Urdan, T. (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs in Adolescents (pp. 181–200). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, L. H., Harris, K. R. & Graham, S. (2002). Every child has a story to tell: Self-regulated strategy development for story writing. Education and Treatment of Children, 25, 496–506.Google Scholar
Meltzer, L., Roditi, B., Houser, R. F. Jr., & Perlman, M. (1998). Perceptions of academic strategies and competence in students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 177–184.Google Scholar
Nicolas, K., Menchetti, B., & Nettles, S. (2005). An exploratory investigation of structured writing strategy training for African-American college students with learning disabilities. Journal of college reading and learning, 36, 37–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page-Voth, V., & Graham, S. (1999). Effects of goal setting and strategy use on the writing performance and self-efficacy of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 230–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory into Practice, 41, 116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in the writing of high school students: A path analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 33, 163–175.3.0.CO;2-C>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., Miller, M. D., & Johnson, M. J. (1999). Gender differences in writing self-efficacy beliefs of elementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 50–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs: Jointly contributing to the quality of human life. In Marsh, H., Craven, R., & McInerney, D. (Eds.), International advances in self-research (Vol. 2, pp. 95–121). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
Pajares, F., & Valiente, G. (1997). The predictive and mediational role of the writing self-efficacy beliefs of upper elementary students. Journal of Educational Research, 90, 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., & Valiente, G. (1999). Grade level and gender differences in the writing self-beliefs of middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 390–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., & Valiente, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 366–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pajares, F., & Valiente, G. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research, (pp. 158–170). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Pajares, F., Valiente, G., & Cheong, Y. F. (2006). Writing self-efficacy an its relation to gender, writing motivation, and writing competence: A developmental perspective. In Rijlaarsdam, G. (Series Ed.) & Boscolo, P., & Hidi, S. (Volume Eds.), Studies in writing. Volume 23, Writing and motivation (pp. 145–162). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sanders, T. J. M., Spooren, W. P. M., & Noordman, L. G. M. (1992). Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes, 15, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, R., Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1992). Direct teaching, strategy instruction, and strategy instruction with explicit self-regulation: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 340–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shell, D. F., Colvin, C., & Bruning, R. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, attributions, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement-level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 386–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorenson, S. (1997). Student writing handbook: The only complete guide to writing across the curriculum (3rd ed.). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Spencer, S. L., & Fitzgerald, J. (1993). Validity and structure, coherence, and quality measures in writing. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performances: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrance, M., Fidalgo, R., & García, J. N. (2007). The teachability and effectiveness of strategies for cognitive self-regulation in sixth grade writers. Learning and Instruction, 17, 265–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troia, G. A. (2002). Teaching writing strategies to children with disabilities: Setting generalization as the goal. Exceptionality, 10, 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troia, G. A. (2006). Writing instruction for students with learning disabilities. In MacArthur, C. A., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research, (pp. 324–336). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). Development between ages of 11 and 25. In Berliner, D. C., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 148–185). New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wong, B. Y. L., Butler, D., Ficzere, S., & Kuperis, S. (1996). Teaching students with learning disabilities and low achievers to plan, write and revise opinion essays. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wong, B. Y. L., Butler, D., Ficzere, S., & Kuperis, S. (1997). Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities and low achievers to plan, write and revise compare and contrast essays. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 12, 2–15.Google Scholar
Wong, B. Y. L., Harris, K. R., Graham, S., & Butler, D. L. (2003). Cognitive strategies instruction research in learning disabilities. In Swanson, H. L., Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities, (pp. 323–345). New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of adolescence. In Pajares, F. & Urdan, T. (Eds.), Adolescence and education. (Vol. 2, pp. 1–27). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 660–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a proficient writer: A self-regulatory perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 73–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar