Running head: Article review 2 1

Article Review 2

Honey Morante

International Teachers College

Article review 2 2

Summary and Review

This article is titled, Implications of Constructivism for Teaching Writing to Students

with Special Needs, and is written by Steve Graham and Karen R. Harris. They examine the

effectiveness of using a constructivist approach to teaching students in general as well as those

with special needs. They recommend using whole language and the process approach as two

constructivist approaches in teaching writing to students with special needs. The whole language

approach is focused on meaning and process, not form, wherein the teacher does not just give

reading and writing exercises but they encourage real use of it in a supportive environment. The

process approach is focused on being a facilitator for students to voice out their own ideas.

Basically, both approaches are centered on students opportunity to have responsibility over their

learning.

The benefits that the authors mention about the whole language and process approach are

that, the students spend more time in writing which improves their writing skills, and is helpful

for students with special needs because they need more time to write. It also helps students with

special needs to have the chance to self-regulate, wherein they can evaluate their own writing

using the criteria made by their teacher. It can also help with integrative learning, since writing

and reading are important with other subjects too, such as math and science.

Aside from the benefits, there are some concerns mentioned about the suggested

approaches. Research has demonstrated that a lot of students with special needs cannot gain

skills unless directly instructed in specific details by the teacher. Furthermore, students with

special needs cannot have sufficient competence in methods of writing if teachers overemphasize

on meaning and process. Teaching students with special needs should be taught the form (skills
Article review 2 3

in handwriting and spelling) too since they will be judged on their product, regardless of the

process they utilize to achieve it.

Reflection and Evaluation

The article encourages a supportive classroom climate as it advises teachers to let

students make choices about what they read and write, have time to read and write, take

ownership and responsibility for their learning, and evaluate their efforts and progress. With this

gracious freedom given to students, they will also be able to mandate creation in a way where

they care towards knowledge that God provides.

The article also urges teachers to accept individual differences in students rates of

progress and this can help me be a redemptive teacher since I would acknowledge that despite

the differences, everyone is equally imperfect but must be seen as Gods children. From my two-

week practicum, I wish I had more time to find out the students differences regarding their

progress so that I could differentiate my lessons better. Unfortunately, I did not teach writing, or

even had the chance to find out who the students with special needs are until almost the end of

the practicum. If I did, I would have given more time for them to process their thinking as

suggested in the article.

This article lacks recognizing that students with special needs are equally fallen human

beings that need redemption. I personally have difficulty in completely agreeing that students

will be judged on their product, regardless of the process they utilize to achieve it. Although

this may be true because teachers do not have access to knowing the process that each student go

through, I think that teachers should still do their best to involve the students individual process

as a part of the final products grade.

Article review 2 4

References

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1994). Implications of constructivism for teaching writing to

students with special needs. Journal Of Special Education, 28(3), 275.

Article review 2 5