Since the early 1970s, many educators have touted writing as a means of enhancing learning. Several reasons have been suggested for this purported enhancement: that writing is a form of learning, that writing approximates human speech, that writing supports learning strategies. Alternatively, some researchers have cautioned that the educative effects of writing may be contingent on the contexts in which it occurs. The research on writing’s effects on learning is ambiguous. This meta-analysis of 48 school-based writing-to-learn programs shows that writing can have a small, positive impact on conventional measures of academic achievement. Two factors predicted enhanced effects: the use of metacognitive prompts and increased treatment length. Two factors predicted reduced effects: implementation in Grades 6–8 and longer writing assignments

Based upon current research needs indicated from recent literature reviews, this integrative review concentrates on two of the perceived major impediments to integrating science and mathematics: The lack of evidence to support integration and the lack of a definition for integration. Using mixed methodology, this review found quantitative evidence favoring integration from a meta‐analysis of 31 studies of student achievement, qualitative evidence revealing the existence of multiple forms of integration, and historical evidence of publishing patterns from across the 20th century. The forms of integration were identified and defined; differential effects were identified both between forms and between science and mathematics when the forms were analyzed by effect size. Additional research implications and suggestions for future research were also identified.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract