Karen R. Harris
Other affiliations: Vanderbilt University, Auburn University, Australian Catholic University ...read more
Bio: Karen R. Harris is an academic researcher from Arizona State University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Teaching method & Learning disability. The author has an hindex of 73, co-authored 216 publications receiving 17939 citations. Previous affiliations of Karen R. Harris include Vanderbilt University & Auburn University.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors set the context for the development of research quality indicators and guidelines for evidence of effective practices provided by different methodologies in the context of special education research.
Abstract: This article sets the context for the development of research quality indicators and guidelines for evidence of effective practices provided by different methodologies. The current conceptualization of scientific research in education and the complexity of conducting research in special education settings underlie the development of quality indicators. Programs of research in special education may be viewed as occurring in stages: moving from initial descriptive research, to experimental causal research, to finally research that examines the processes that might affect wide-scale adoption and use of a practice. At each stage, different research questions are relevant, and different research methodologies to address the research questions are needed.
TL;DR: The authors conducted a meta-analysis of the writing intervention literature, focusing their efforts on true and quasi-experiments, and calculated an average weighted effect size (ES) for 13 writing interventions.
Abstract: In an effort to identify effective instructional practices for teaching writing to elementary grade students, we conducted a meta-analysis of the writing intervention literature, focusing our efforts on true and quasi-experiments. We located 115 documents that included the statistics for computing an effect size (ES). We calculated an average weighted ES for 13 writing interventions. To be included in the analysis, a writing intervention had to be tested in 4 studies. Six writing interventions involved explicitly teaching writing processes, skills, or knowledge. All but 1 of these interventions (grammar instruction) produced a statistically significant effect: strategy instruction (ES = 1.02), adding self-regulation to strategy instruction (ES = 0.50), text structure instruction (ES = 0.59), creativity/imagery instruction (ES = 0.70), and teaching transcription skills (ES = 0.55). Four writing interventions involved procedures for scaffolding or supporting students' writing. Each of these interventions produced statistically significant effects: prewriting activities (ES = 0.54), peer assistance when writing (ES = 0.89), product goals (ES = 0.76), and assessing writing (0.42). We also found that word processing (ES = 0.47), extra writing (ES = 0.30), and comprehensive writing programs (ES = 0.42) resulted in a statistically significant improvement in the quality of students' writing. Moderator analyses revealed that the self-regulated strategy development model (ES = 1.17) and process approach to writing instruction (ES = 0.40) improved how well students wrote. Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029185.supp
TL;DR: In this paper, the development of writing competence depends on high levels of self-regulation and the mastery of low-level transcription skills, and the accumulated evidence generally supports both of these propositions.
Abstract: It is proposed that the development of writing competence depends on high levels of self-regulation and the mastery of low-level transcription skills. Predictions consistent with each of these claims are identified and evaluated. Although the available data are incomplete and many key findings require further replication, the accumulated evidence generally supports both of these propositions.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the effectiveness of an instructional model, Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), designed to foster development in strategic behavior, knowledge, and motivation.
Abstract: Writing is a complex task. Its development depends in large part on changes that occur in children’s strategic behavior, knowledge, and motivation. In the present study, the effectiveness of an instructional model, Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD), designed to foster development in each of these areas, was examined. Adding a peer support component to SRSD instruction to facilitate maintenance and generalization was also examined. Struggling, third grade writers, the majority of whom were minority students attending schools that served primarily low-income families, received SRSD instruction focused primarily on learning writing strategies and knowledge for planning and composing stories and persuasive essays. These students wrote longer, more complete, and qualitatively better papers for both of these genres than peers in the comparison condition (Writers’ Workshop). These effects were maintained over time for story writing and generalized to a third uninstructed genre, informative writing. SRSD instruction boosted students’ knowledge about writing as well. The peer support component augmented SRSD instruction by increasing students’ knowledge of planning and enhancing generalization to informative and narrative writing. In contrast, self-efficacy for writing was not influenced by either SRSD condition (with or without peer support).
TL;DR: A review of the field of learning disabilities can be found in this article, where the authors present an overview of the current state of the art in the field and present the most effective service delivery model for students with learning disabilities.
Abstract: Part I: Foundations and Current Perspectives. Swanson, Harris, Graham, Overview of Foundations, Causes, Instruction, and Methodology in the Field of Learning Disabilities. Hallahan, Mock, A Brief History of the Field of Learning Disabilities. Fletcher, Morris, Lyon, Classification and Definition of Learning Disabilities: An Integrative Perspective. Herr, Bateman, Learning Disabilities and the Law. Kavale, Forness, Learning Disability as a Discipline. Gersten, Baker, English-Language Learners with Learning Disabilities. Zigmond, Searching for the Most Effective Service Delivery Model for Students with Learning Disabilities. Part II: Causes and Behavioral Manifestations. Cutting, Denckla, Attention: Relationships Between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Learning Disabilities. Bowers, Ishaik, RAN's Contribution to Understanding Reading Disabilities. Siegel, Basic Cognitive Processes and Reading Disabilities. Swanson, Saez, Memory Difficulties in Children and Adults with Learning Disabilities. Geary, Learning Disabilities in Arithmetic: Problem-solving Differences and Cognitive Deficits. Mann, Language Processes: Keys to Reading Disability. Elbaum, Vaughn, Self-concept and Students with Learning Disabilities. Miller, Sanchez, Hynd, Neurological Correlates of Reading Disabilities. Thomson, Raskind, Genetic Influences on Reading and Writing Disabilities. Part III: Effective Instruction. Lovett, Barron, Benson, Effective Remediation of Word Identification and Decoding Difficulties in School-age Children with Reading Disabilities. Williams, Teaching Text Structure to Improve Reading Comprehension. L. S. Fuchs, D. S. Fuchs, Enhancing the Mathematical Problem Solving of Students with Mathematics Disabilities. Graham, Harris, Students with Learning Disabilities and the Process of Writing: A Meta-analysis of SRSD Studies. Berninger, Amtmann, Preventing Written Expression Disabilities through Early and Continuing Assessment and Intervention for Handwriting and/or Spelling Problems: Research into Practice. Scruggs, Mastropieri, Science and Social Studies. Part IV: Formation of Instructional Models. Wong, Harris, Graham, Butler, Cognitive Strategies Instruction Research in Learning Disabilities. Adams, Carnine, Direct Instruction. Jenkins, O'Connor, Cooperative Learning for Students with Learning Disabilities: Evidence from Experiments, Observations, and Interviews. D. S. Fuchs, L. S. Fuchs, McMaster, Al Otaiba, Identifying Children at Risk for Reading Failure: Curriculum-based Measurement and the Dual-discrepancy Approach. Englert, Mariage, The Sociocultural Model in Special Education Interventions: Apprenticing Students in Higher-order Thinking. Part V: Methodology. Abbott, Amtmann, Munson, Exploratory and Confirmatory Methods in Learning Disabilities Research. Schumaker, Deshler, Designs for Applied Educational Research. Speece, The Methods of Cluster Analysis and the Study of Learning Disabilities. S. E. Shaywitz, B. A. Shaywitz, Neurobiological Indices of Dyslexia. MacArthur, What Have We Learned about Learning Disabilities from Qualitative Research?: A Review of Studies.
TL;DR: A review of the literature on classroom formative assessment can be found in this article, where the authors consider the perceptions of students and their role in self-assessment alongside analysis of the strategies used by teachers and the formative strategies incorporated in such systemic approaches as mastery learning.
Abstract: This article is a review of the literature on classroom formative assessment. Several studies show firm evidence that innovations designed to strengthen the frequent feedback that students receive about their learning yield substantial learning gains. The perceptions of students and their role in self‐assessment are considered alongside analysis of the strategies used by teachers and the formative strategies incorporated in such systemic approaches as mastery learning. There follows a more detailed and theoretical analysis of the nature of feedback, which provides a basis for a discussion of the development of theoretical models for formative assessment and of the prospects for the improvement of practice.
TL;DR: In this paper, the effects of person variables (goal setting and information processing) and situation variables (models, attributional feedback, and rewards) on self-efficacy and motivation are reviewed.
Abstract: Academic motivation is discussed in terms of self-efficacy, an individual's judgments of his or her capabilities to perform given actions. After presenting an overview of self-efficacy theory, I contrast self-efficacy with related constructs (perceived control, outcome expectations, perceived value of outcomes, attributions, and self-concept) and discuss some efficacy research relevant to academic motivation. Studies of the effects of person variables (goal setting and information processing) and situation variables (models, attributional feedback, and rewards) on self-efficacy and motivation are reviewed. In conjunction with this discussion, I mention substantive issues that need to be addressed in the self-efficacy research and summarize evidence on the utility of self-efficacy for predicting motivational outcomes. Areas for future research are suggested.
01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: In this paper, the structure of self-regulatory systems, social and physical environmental context influences on self-regulation, dysfunctions in selfregulation, and selfregulatory development are discussed.
Abstract: Perhaps our most important quality as humans is our capability to self-regulate. It has provided us with an adaptive edge that enabled our ancestors to survive and even flourish when changing conditions led other species to extinction. Our regulatory skill and lack thereof is the source of our perception of personal agency that lies at the core of our sense of self. Understanding how this capability develops, its various subcomponents, and its functions has been a major thrust of social cognitive theory and research. Of equal importance is the explanation for common dysfunctions in self-regulatory functioning, such as biased self-monitoring, self-blaming judgments, and defensive self-reactions. This chapter will define self-regulation, and will discuss the structure of self-regulatory systems, social and physical environmental context influences on self-regulation, dysfunctions in self-regulation, and self-regulatory development. (http://books.google.fr/books?id=u9e1RWMbtjEC&lpg=PP1&hl=fr&pg=PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false)
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a general definition of self-regulated academic learning and identify the distinctive features of this capability for acquiring knowledge and skill, drawing on subsequent articles in this journal issue as well as my research with colleagues.
Abstract: Educational researchers have begun recently to identify and study key processes through which students self-regulate their academic learning. In this overview, I present a general definition of self-regulated academic learning and identify the distinctive features of this capability for acquiring knowledge and skill. Drawing on subsequent articles in this journal issue as well as my research with colleagues, I discuss how the study of component processes contributes to our growing understanding of the distinctive features of students' self-regulated learning. Finally, the implications of self-regulated learning perspective on students' learning and achievement are considered.