Background Information

I have been teaching writing for approximately four years now and I've noticed a trend.  With the establishment and maintenance of Response to Intervention time within school schedules, focus (in my school at least) has been placed on under achieving students...which makes sense, right?

After two years of intervention scheduling and many trial and error periods, I feel my school and grade level has the RTI (Response to Intervention) instruction together. 

In my personal endeavors, I have succeeded with focusing on under achieving students, but I have also forgotten about my higher achieving students. 

My classes are flexibly grouped, and it did not take me long to realize how much my higher group struggled with writing in general.  Of course, a few students stood out as natural-born writers.  To put this into perspective, the majority of my group's MAP scores were approximately 10-20+ points above the average fifth grader, yet, when I scored their writing pieces, that same majority scored an "L" (otherwise known as a limited understanding of the standard/skill). 

So my question evolved into, "Why are my higher students barely scoring an Apprentice on their writing assessments?"

My district recently adopted the Six Traits Model of Writing guide book by Ruth Culham.  There are many other supplemental resources available aligned with the Six Traits, but Ruth Culham and her research team at the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory created the Six Traits based upon prior research regarding what good writing looks like.   Because my district adopted this resource, and because of my frustrations and findings with my higher achieving group, I proposed that I determine the overall effectiveness of the Six Traits Writing Model when implemented with my high achieving group of students.

So, please join me on this journey to determine the effectiveness of the Six Traits of Writing when used with higher achieving students!

Happy blogging,

Emily