The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey.
Abstract
A random sample of language arts, social studies, and science high school teachers (N = 361; 53% women) from the United States were surveyed about what their students wrote, their use of evidence-based writing practices, the adaptations they made for weaker writers, how they assessed writing, their preparation to teach writing, beliefs about the importance of writing, and judgments about their students' writing capabilities. The findings from this survey raised some concerns about the quality of high school writing instruction. The writing activities they were assigned most frequently by teachers involved little analysis and interpretation, and almost one half of the participating teachers did not assign at least one multiparagraph writing assignment monthly. Although the majority of high school teachers did apply most of the evidence-based practices and adaptations included in the survey, they used these practices infrequently. Most teachers did not believe their college teacher education program adequately prepared them to teach writing. A sizable minority of language arts and social studies teachers indicated that their in-service preparation was inadequate too. For science teachers this was close to 60%.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445 · Cited by 1,609
Self-citationThe Effects of School-Based Writing-to-Learn Interventions on Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543074001029 · Cited by 802
Cited by
Writing to Read: A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Writing and Writing Instruction on Reading
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.81.4.t2k0m13756113566 · Cited by 563
Self-citationComparing the quality of human and ChatGPT feedback of students’ writing
Steiss, J., Tate, T., Graham, S., Cruz, J., Hebert, M., Wang, J., Moon, Y., Tseng, W., Warschauer, M., & Olson, C. B. (2024) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101894 · Cited by 509
Self-citationTeaching Writing to Elementary Students in Grades 4–6: A National Survey
Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/651193 · Cited by 386
Self-citationThe process writing approach: a meta-analysis
Graham, S., & Sandmel, K. (2011) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2010.488703 · Cited by 374
Self-citationFormative Assessment and Writing: A Meta-Analysis
Graham, S., Hebert, M., & Harris, K. R. (2015) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/681947 · Cited by 340
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Kiuhara, S. A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 2009-02
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 136-160
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2009472740
- Cited by
- 396
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 49.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0013097
- The paper
- Kiuhara, S. A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013097
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.