The DOI matches its Crossref record.
EJ Extra: A Snapshot of Writing Instruction in Middle Schools and High Schools [FREE ACCESS]
Abstract
In the May 2009 issue of English Journal , we reported on our analysis of data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to provide a first look at changes in the teaching of writing over the past 30 years. In this article, we provide a more detailed look, drawing on data collected from visits to 260 English, math, social studies, and science classrooms in 20 middle schools and high schools in five states (schools all chosen for reputations for excellence in the teaching of writing), interviews with 220 teachers and administrators, and with 138 students in these schools, and a national survey of 1520 randomly selected teachers.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Humanities teachers' reservation to use the AI tool seems to reflect from the belief that this will eventually hurt students in developing the necessary analytical and interpretative skills, especially in those areas that require originality, subtlety, and personal involvement with the text, as shown through their short responses in over reliance and plagiarism (Applebee & Langer, 2011).”
From A cross-sectional look at teacher reactions, worries, and professional development needs related to generative AI in an urban school district (2025) · cites this paper as Applebee & Langer, 2011
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Changing How Writing Is Taught
Graham, S. (2019) · Review of Research in Education · doi:10.3102/0091732x18821125 · Cited by 511
Comparing 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
The Effects of Writing on Learning in Science, Social Studies, and Mathematics: A Meta-Analysis
Graham, S., Kiuhara, S. A., & MacKay, M. (2020) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654320914744 · Cited by 295
Writing: importance, development, and instruction
Graham, S., Rouse, A. G., & McKeown, D. (2012) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9395-2 · Cited by 270
Research-Based Writing Practices and the Common Core
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/681964 · Cited by 244
Metadata
- Authors
- Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A.
- Venue
- English Journal
- Published
- 2011-07-01
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 14-27
- ISSN
- 0013-8274 (ISSN-L)
- 2161-8895
- OpenAlex
- W4392435448
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 49.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The English Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Linguistics and Education Research
- Social Sciences › Education › Education Pedagogy and Practices
- Keywords
- writing instruction, junior high school, high schools, writing teachers, writing curriculum, National Assessment of Educational Progress, writing assessment, teacher perceptions, student perceptions, classroom observation
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
