Abstract
Even though reading and writing are more important than ever, an unacceptable number of children do not acquire the reading or writing skills needed for educational, social, and occupational success. While we have made considerable progress in identifying effective reading and writing practices, it is important to identify additional practices that can enhance literacy performance if students are to acquire essential reading and writing skills. One purpose of this chapter is to examine whether writing and writing instruction provide a useful means for enhancing how well students read. To answer this question, we drew upon data from recent meta-analyses of true- and quasi-instructional experiments (Graham & Hebert In Harvard Educational Review, pp. 710−744); Graham & Santangelo In Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 27:1703–1743, 2014); Hebert, Gillespie, & Graham In Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal 26:111–138, 2013). The lens used to examine the evidence from these meta-analyses were three theories of reading and writing relationships (shared knowledge, functional view, and rhetorical relations), as described by Shanahan In Handbook of writing research. Guilford, New York, pp. 171–183, 2006). A second purpose of this chapter is to examine whether reading and reading instruction improve writing performance. The same theoretical lens was applied, but it was necessary to widen our search for evidence to include findings from individual studies as well as meta-analyses, including meta-analyses conducted prior to 2000. The available evidence provided support for all three theoretical models. This was true for the effects of writing on reading and vice versa. We further found that writing, writing instruction, and writing about material read were evidenced-based reading practices. We did not make similar claims about reading-oriented evidenced-based writing practices due to limitations on the evidence reviewed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Applebee, A. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577–596.
Brodney, B., Reeves, C., & Kazelskis, R. (1999). Selected prewriting treatments: Effects on expository compositions written by fifth graders. The Journal of Experimental Education, 68, 5–20.
Bus, A., & van IJzendoorn, M. (1999). Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 403–414.
Cook, B., Smith, G., & Tankersley, M. (2012). Evidence-based practices in education. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 495–527). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Couzijn, M. (1999). Learning to write by observation of writing and reading processes: Effects on learning and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 9, 109–142.
Doan, K., & Bloomfield, A. (2014). The effects of browse time on the internet on students’ essay scores. TechTrends, 58, 63–72.
Ehri, L. (1987). Learning to read and spell words. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 5–31.
Ehri, L., Nunes, S., Stahl, S., & Willows, D. (2001a). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447.
Ehri, L., Nunes, S., Willows, D., Schuster, B., Yaghoub-Zadeh, Z., & Shanahan, T. (2001b). Phonemic awareness instruction helps children learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(6), 250–287.
Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122–128.
Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 39–50.
Fitzgerald, J., & Spiegel, D. L. (1983). Enhancing children’s reading comprehension through instruction in narrative structure. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25(2), 1–17.
Graham, S. (2000). Should the natural learning approach replace traditional spelling instruction? Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 235–247.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Elementary School Journal, 115, 498–522.
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to reading: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellence in Education.
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011). Writing-to-read: A meta-analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81, 710–744.
Graham, S., Kiuhara, S., McKeown, D., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 879–896.
Graham, S., & Perrin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476.
Graham, S., Rouse, A., & Harris, K. R. (in press). Scientifically supported writing practices. In A. O’Donnell (Ed.), Oxford handbook of educational psychology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 27, 1703–1743.
Hebert, M., Gillespie, A., & Graham, S. (2013). Comparing effects of different writing activities on reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 111–138.
Herlihy, C., Kemple, J., Bloom, H., Zhu, P., & Berlin, G. (2009). Understanding reading first: What we know, what we don’t, and what’s next. Accessed on July 19, 2015 http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/understanding_reading_first.pdf
International Reading Association/National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2012). The reading-writing connection. Washington, DC: International Reading Association and Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Jampole, E., Konopak, B., Readence, J., & Moser, B. (1991). Using mental imagery to enhance gifted elementary students’ creative writing. Reading Psychology, 12, 183–197.
Klein, P. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 203–270.
Langer, J. A., & Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Mason, L., Davison, M., Hammer, C., Miller, C., & Glutting, J. (2013). Knowledge, writing, and language outcomes for a reading comprehension and writing intervention. Reading and Writing, 26, 113–1158.
Meyer, B., Middlemiss, W., Theodorou, E., Brezinski, K., McDougall, J., & Bartlett, B. (2002). Effects of structure strategy instruction delivered to a fifth-grade children using the internet with and without the aid of older adult tutors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 486–519.
Moore, N., & MacArthur, C. (2012). The effects of bring a reader and of observing readers on fifth-grade students’ argumentative writing and revising. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 1449–1478.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2014). A first look: 2013 mathematics and reading. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
National Institute of Children’s Health and Development. (2000). Report of the national reading panel: Teaching students to read: An evidenced-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.
Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. (1998). The reading-writing connection. In N. Nelson & R. Calfee (Eds), Ninety-seventh yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II, pp. 1–52). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.
Neville, D., & Searls, E. (1991). A meta-analytic review of the effects of sentence-combining on reading comprehension. Reading Research & Instruction, 31, 63–76.
Norris, K. (2008). Studying the effects of increased volume of on-level, self-selected reading on ninth graders’ fluency, comprehension, and motivation. Unpublished dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
Olinghouse, N., Graham, S., & Gillespie, A. (2015). The relationship of discourse and topic knowledge to writing performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 391–406.
Olinghouse, N., & Wilson, J. (2013). The relationship between vocabulary and writing quality in three genres. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 45–66.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2012). PISA 2012 results in focus. Published by OCED. Accessed July 19, 2005. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf
Perfetti, C. (1997). The psycholinguistics of spelling and reading. In C. A. Perfetti, L. Rieben, & M. Royol (Eds.), Learning to spell (pp. 21–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rubin, D. (1984). Social cognition and written communication. Written Communication, 1, 211–246.
Sackett, D., Rosenberg, W., Gray, J., Haynes, R., & Richardson, W. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, 312, 71–72.
Saddler, B., & Graham, S. (2005). The effects of peer–assisted sentence combining instruction on the writing performance of more and less skilled young writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 43–54.
Shanahan, T. (2006). Relations among oral language, reading, and writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 171–183). New York: Guilford.
Shanahan, T. (in press). Relationships between reading and writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Share, D. (1999). Phonological recoding and orthographic learning: A direct test of the self-teaching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 72, 95–192.
Share, D. (2004). Orthographic learning at a glance: On the time course and developmental onset of self-teaching. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87, 267–298.
Stotsky, S. (1982). The role of writing in developmental reading. Journal of Reading, 25(4), 320–340.
Tierney, R., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & D. Pearson (Eds.), The handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 246–280). NY: Longman.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Graham, S., Harris, K.R. (2017). Reading and Writing Connections: How Writing Can Build Better Readers (and Vice Versa). In: Ng, C., Bartlett, B. (eds) Improving Reading and Reading Engagement in the 21st Century. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4331-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4331-4_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4330-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4331-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)