Writing skills are getting more attention in school 7%

By Jackie Mader29%

8/6/2026, 10:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Negativity Bias, and Unattributed Quote, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 44.6% saturation with 172 hits. Analysis detected 752 faulty-reasoning hits from 386 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 16.2% and a BS Rank of 7% (28,479 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.10% of the article peer group.

In suburban Denver, the Douglas County system uses a program districtwide that it says has improved the way students organize and execute their writing. 
Each year, we get a pretty good idea of how kids across the country are doing with their math and reading skills. 
But writing? 
That’s a different story. 
Few states test students on how well they can write, and the country hasn’t published national writing test results for elementary-age children since 2002. 
Regardless, experts say they have a sense of how it’s going: “The word on the street is that kids can’t write,” said Vicki McQuitty, a professor in Towson University’s elementary education program and director of the Maryland Writing Project, an initiative aimed at improving writing instruction. 
Younger children struggle with basic sentences, spelling and punctuation, leading to problems later on in school when they’re expected to produce more complex works. 
In Colorado’s Douglas County a few years ago, school district leaders noticed their students were generally scoring well on the state’s end-of-year tests, except when it came to the writing section. 
“We found that teachers didn’t know how to teach writing,” said Janet Merrill, literacy coordinator for the school system, located in suburban Denver. 
As is the case in many districts, teachers in Douglas County had largely been left on their own to teach writing. 
They were using a hodgepodge of methods, including buying materials online made by other teachers. 
Writing instruction varied greatly from class to class. 
Merrill started researching science-backed ways to teach writing and learned that there are effective approaches that aren’t commonly known. 
The district hired Releasing Writers , an organization that trains teachers in a structured instructional method that gives students specific strategies to plan and organize their writing. 
Within a year, middle school teachers were asking what was happening at the elementary level. 
They had never seen students coming to them with such strong writing skills. 
Now three years into the new writing program, scores across subject areas are going up. 
What does the “science of writing” encompass, and what does it look like on the ground? 
Read my recent story , published in partnership with The Denver Post. 
The post Writing skills are getting more attention in school appeared first on The Hechinger Report . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 44.6%Jackie Mader: 1.8%The Hechinger Report: 1.0%Confirmation Bias44.6%This article: 8.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.8%Anchoring Bias8.0%This article: 31.1%Jackie Mader: 0.9%The Hechinger Report: 1.3%Availability Heuristic31.1%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Jackie Mader: 0.2%The Hechinger Report: 0.7%Overconfidence Bias4.9%This article: 2.1%Jackie Mader: 1.6%The Hechinger Report: 2.4%Framing Effect2.1%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.7%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.4%Jackie Mader: 0.2%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%Status Quo Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.0%Jackie Mader: 1.1%The Hechinger Report: 1.5%Optimism Bias6.0%This article: 1.0%Jackie Mader: 3.2%The Hechinger Report: 1.7%Pessimism Bias1.0%This article: 20.2%Jackie Mader: 7.8%The Hechinger Report: 7.6%Negativity Bias20.2%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.4%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.2%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.3%The Hechinger Report: 0.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.9%Jackie Mader: 0.5%The Hechinger Report: 0.5%Recency Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 6.0%Jackie Mader: 0.9%The Hechinger Report: 1.4%Appeal to Authority6.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.7%The Hechinger Report: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 4.0%The Hechinger Report: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.1%Jackie Mader: 2.9%The Hechinger Report: 2.1%Hasty Generalization10.1%This article: 3.1%Jackie Mader: 0.3%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Red Herring3.1%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 3.7%The Hechinger Report: 1.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.2%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.8%Jackie Mader: 1.7%The Hechinger Report: 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.8%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.2%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 4.9%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Appeal to Nature4.9%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.4%Jackie Mader: 4.2%The Hechinger Report: 4.4%Anecdotal3.4%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.1%Jackie Mader: 0.9%The Hechinger Report: 0.4%Middle Ground4.1%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.9%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.1%Unattributed Quote11.9%This article: 3.1%Jackie Mader: 0.8%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection3.1%This article: 6.2%Jackie Mader: 0.6%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%Biased Writer Voice6.2%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jackie Mader: 0.0%The Hechinger Report: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Jackie Mader: 0.7%The Hechinger Report: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.0%

386 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers29%attributed speech273writer words
Selected voice

Vicki McQuitty

100%flagged-word coverage
46 attributed words41% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Vicki McQuitty: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.8 ptsWriter: 8.8%Vicki McQuitty: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-4.4 ptsWriter: 4.4%Vicki McQuitty: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.