**4. Discussion and conclusions**

188 Learning Disabilities

If we considering the total writing measures (product totals from reader and text-based measures) and the measures of the PRAES (scale and the subscale totals) as predicting variables, and the type of student as the predicted variable, we obtain statistically significant results. When the measures are taken only from writing, statistically significant results in the prediction of the type of students were also obtained. However, when only the PRAES results are considered, they do produce statistically significant results in the prediction of the type of student. In any case, this is interesting, as it does not support the idea of there existing differences in the teachers' practices based on student typology. When the type of student is taken as a dependent variable (ADHD, LD, without LD) or as a variable predicted by the set of the total measures of the written product (students' achievement), in the hierarchic multiple regression step-by-step analysis, we obtained one model with a statistically significant regression coefficient (R² corrected =.496). The variables in the model that reached statistical significance are, among others: writing, reader based evaluation concerning order and structure [β = .711; t = 7.557; p = .001] and other aspects of total coherence [β = -.283; t = -2.447; p = .018]; those from the PRAES as regards classroom practice and the procedure subcomponent [β = -.237; t = -2.645; p = .011] and for the opinion and the motivation subcomponent [β = .182; t = 2.167; p =.035]. The remaining variables

were excluded from the model, as they did not reach statistical significance.

results which are very relevant from a theoretical point of view.

training, motivation, classroom practices, the use of plans and revision.

When the writing variables (the product totals from the reader and text-based measures) are taken as predicted variables and the PRAES variables as predicting, many produce statistically significant results, albeit of a low level. However, this is interesting, as they indicate a tendency, and given the nature of the different measures this points towards

The fact that some total measures from the PRAES predict some totals for the writing product is very interesting, given that there is some relationship between the two. For example, the factors that are involved in the prediction of total productivity include the factors attributed to the family and the formal teaching approach, as are those used by teachers who will mainly employ these in students without LD. Other variables regarding teaching staff that predict some measure of achievement in writing are the procedures used (in several variables), the role assigned to the family, the materials used (in several variables), the natural teaching approach (more used with the group of students without LD and those with ADHD), personal self-efficacy, the formal teaching approach, teacher

Of the 27 regression analyses extracted to predict writing based on PRAES, 23 were found to have statistical significance. The variables from the PRAES that are predictive regarding writing concentrate on the family subcomponent, classroom activities with the subcomponents of procedures and materials, in addition to the formal theoretical approach, the natural learning approach, personal self-efficacy, teacher training, motivation and the aspects of planning and revision. In addition, the attempt to predict writing achievement based on total productivity and the number of words parameter from the PRAES was

**3.1 Multiple linear regression analysis** 

**Prediction of student typology** 

**Prediction of the written product** 

The objective of the present study was to consider the teachers' self-regulation in the teaching of written composition in relation to the achievement of students with and without LD and/or under achievement. It was expected that the results of this study would show that the teachers' beliefs both affect and have a strong influence in their classroom practices concerning written composition and also that this predicts students' success. According to the results obtained it is possible to affirm that, broadly speaking, the objective was achieved. As for the hypotheses, they were only proven for some measures but not for others. For example, data was obtained which supports the differences between the students based on the PRAES assessment. The potential of the PRAES to predict writing achievement was also demonstrated. However, data was collected which does not necessarily corroborate the prediction of the typology of students based the PRAES. This may be due to the nature of the measures or perhaps because there is no actual predictive potential. As far as the sample is concerned, as well as being representative, relevant and of a broad spectrum (compared with the samples in other empirical studies), it also allows us to describe the students' achievement according to the type of practice employed by teachers.

As regards the instruments used, given the revision of empirical and theoretical studies published in recent years, we can confirm that the PRAES and the applied writing measures (general and specific) used to evaluate both general achievement and specific aspects of written composition display not only acceptable validity and reliability but, also, appropriate sensitivity to the detection of differences based on the type of student and according to the prediction between variables. It is important to highlight that we know of no published studies that jointly employ the four PRAES components (Opinion, Approach, Classroom Behavior, Self-efficacy) to evaluate teachers, as well as the instruments applied to evaluate and to measure students' general and specific achievement in written composition, and that link both teacher and student measures. This justifies and affords relevance to the present study. As concerns the statistical analysis and its contribution to the study, when taking the intersubject factors – the three typologies of students (ADHD, LD, without LD) – as dependent variables, the different measures obtained for students and teachers verify the differences among the teachers regarding the role of their practice in teaching written composition, based on the differences according to the students' typology.

The results obtained are of high statistical significance in most of the dependent variables regarding students and teachers, with large effect sizes, in general. As regards the students, when belonging to one group type is taken as a grouping variable (with ADHD, with and

The Quality of Teaching Determines Students' Achievement in Writing 191

observation of students' achievement in the classroom. It also seems reasonable to carry out this type of analysis in other areas and to observe whether there is any general pattern or

During this research study, we received competitive funds from the Spanish Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation (MICINN) (EDU2010-19250 / EDUC) for 2010-2013, and Excellence Research Group funds from the Junta de Castilla y León (GR259), with FEDER funds from the European Union for 2009-2010-2011 (BOCyL 27 on April 2009). Both were awarded to the Director/Main Researcher (J. N. García). We are very grateful to Victoria

*Correspondence* should be addressed to Departamento de Psicología, Sociología y Filosofía. Área Psicología Evolutiva y de la Educación. Campus de Vegazana s/n, 24071 – León, Spain. Phone: +34-987291041 (university); +34-987222118 (home); +34-652817871 (cell); Fax:

Almargot, D. & Chanquoy, L. (2001). *Through the models of writing*. Kluwer Academic

Álvarez, M.; Robledo, P.; García, J.; de Caso, A.; Pacheco, D. & García-Martín, J. (2011).

Psicología y Educación, (Ed.), ISBN 978-84-614-8296-2, Valladolid, Spain. Al-Weher, M. (2004). The effect of a training course based on constructivism on student

Chanquoy, L. (2001). How to make it easier for children to revise their writing: A study of

De Caso, A.; García, J.; Pacheco, D.; Robledo, P.; Álvarez, M. & García-Martín, J. (2011).

De la Fuente, J.; Pichardo M.; Justicia, F. & Berbén A. (2008). Enfoques de aprendizaje,

Metodologías trabajadas y favorecedoras del aprendizaje [Tried methodologies that enhance learning], *Educación, aprendizaje y desarrollo en una sociedad multicultural. Psicología de la instrucción,* pp. 7379-7386, *[Education, learning and development in a multicultural society. Psycology of Instruction],* In J.M. Román Sánchez, M.Á. Carbonero Martín and J.D. Valdivieso Pastor (Comp.), Asociación Nacional de

teacher's perceptions of the teaching/learning process*. Asia- Pacific Journal of* 

text revision from 3rd to 5th grades. *British Journal of Educational Psychology*, Vol. 71,

Componente motivacional, estrategias de aprendizaje e innovación educativa [Motivational component, learning strategies and educational innovation], *Educación, aprendizaje y desarrollo en una sociedad multicultural. Psicología de la instrucción [Education, learning and development in a multicultural society. Psycology of Instruction],* (pp. 7343 -7353)*,* In J. M Román Sánchez, M. Á. Carbonero Martín and J. D. Valdivieso Pastor (Comp.). Asociación Nacional de Psicología y Educación,

autorregulación y rendimiento en tres universidades europeas. [Approaches to learning, self-regulation and performance in three European universities].

Publishers (Ed.), ISBN 7923-6980-7, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

*Teacher Education,* Vol. 32 No.2, pp. 169-184, ISSN 1359-866X.

(Ed.), ISBN 978-84-614-8296-2, Valladolid, Spain.

*Psicothema*, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 705-711, ISSN 1132-9483.

specific patterns related to the practices in each area.

Rosa Sturley for her help with the English version.

pp. 15-41, ISSN 0144-6657.

+34-987291035 (university). E-mail: jn.garcia@unileon.es.

**5. Acknowledgments** 

**6. References** 

without LD), statistically significant differences are observed, both for the writing tasks as for the comparison-contrast texts. In comparison-contrast texts, significant differences were observed regarding the variables of information generation, organization of ideas, structure or reader-based quality. Examples include the organization of ideas in relational coherence, reader-based evaluation concerning structure, and reader-based evaluation for order and quality. Also, in the writing task statistically significant differences were found regarding idea generation and total productivity, in reader-based evaluation for order, structure and quality. As far as teachers are concerned, it is interesting to observe that they behave differently based on the students they have, as regards motivation, general or natural teaching approach and self-efficacy. The tests of intersubject effects indicated statistical significance for the opinion variables, in the subcomponents of motivation; approach, natural learning; and general self-efficacy.

When trying to extract some pattern that would help understand the relationship between what teachers actually do when they teach writing and students' achievement, a very interesting observation was made. A relationship was noted underlining the fact that some total measures of the PRAES predicted some totals of the writing product. Other variables concerning the teachers that helped to predict some measures in writing achievement were the procedures used, the role assigned to the family, the materials employed, the natural teaching approach, personal self-efficacy, the formal approach, teacher training, motivation, the practice and the use of plans and revisions. Of these, those that most significantly predict writing variables are: the family, the activities carried out in the classroom along with the procedures and the materials used, as well as the use the formal theoretical approach.

When the type of students (ADHD, with and without LD) was taken as an independent or a predicted variable from the set of total measures of the writing product we found variables included in the model related to writing: writing a draft, reader-based evaluation, order and structure and other aspects of total coherence. We also noted variables related to the PRAES: practice in the classroom in the procedure subcomponent; opinion and the motivation subcomponent. The remaining variables were excluded from the model, as they did not reach statistical significance. When we attempted to predict writing achievement through total productivity in the 'number of words' parameter, a regression model or equation was obtained with the following PRAES predicting variables: opinion, the family subcomponent, and the formal approach. No other variable was found to be significant. These factors are, at least indirectly, based on the type of teachers' practice in the area of Spanish language. There were no significant differences in relation to the theoretical concepts and strategies applied in the teaching of writing in the different school years from Infant to Primary. There were, nevertheless, differences based on age, which is an indicator of some type of adjustment according to the students' stage of development. According to the results obtained, all teachers seem to act in a homogenous way as far as the theoretical conceptions that direct their behavior are concerned - or in other respects, which indicates poor selfregulation of their practice. In addition, it appears that their practice of teaching writing does not substantially differ between students with and without learning difficulties and/or low levels of achievement.

It is clear that this study presents evident limitations concerning the use of PRAES, and it should be complemented with direct observation of the teachers' behavior as well as direct observation of students' achievement in the classroom. It also seems reasonable to carry out this type of analysis in other areas and to observe whether there is any general pattern or specific patterns related to the practices in each area.
