By researching writing interventions, we may learn more about the art of writing, its history, and the most successful teaching strategies. Unfortunately, Graham and his colleagues discovered that a lot of previously completed writing intervention studies had a poor degree of scientific rigor in various meta-analyses, despite the importance of this area of research (Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012; Graham & Perin, 2007; Rogers & Graham, 2008). In the context of this article, we offer twelve recommendations for doing intervention research successfully. These suggestions are based on my ta-analyses, past research (Pressley & Harris, 1994a, 1994b) on raising the caliber of intervention research, and our unique experiences as authors of intervention research and editors of publications that do so, including the Journal of Writing Research. I sincerely hope you will find these suggestions useful. The ideas encompass all aspects of planning, conducting, and reporting the findings of such research, as well as the issues and steps involved.
 This article lists the best procedures for planning, carrying out, and presenting writing interventions-based research. We believe this type of research is crucial for achieving substantial advancements in theory and practice, and as a result, we view this as a serious issue (more about this later). Moreover, we have committed a considerable amount of our academic careers to conducting research of this sort and evaluating and synthesizing the current research on writing interventions, so it is important to us personally and professionally (see Graham & Harris, 2009, 2012). (Graham, Harris, and Chambers are now working on a publication, for instance.)
 Not only do we like what we do, but we also feel that we require experience. Thus we entered this area of work. Having previously worked as general and education professors, we were dissatisfied with the "pied-piper" approach employed to educate in schools (where instructional practices are promoted and sold with passion and articulate rhetoric but with little or no evidence of effectiveness). We were curious to learn more about alternative techniques that may help aspiring writers hone their craft (e.g., Harris & Graham, 1996).
 The suggestions made in this post were created using our former experiences as a guide. Our meta-analyses of writing intervention research's findings have taught us a lot about the benefits and drawbacks of this body of information (e.g., Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012; Graham & Perin, 2007; Rogers & Graham, 2008). We are well aware of the many obstacles that must be overcome to conduct studies of this kind since we have prior experience working in writing intervention research. We have a wealth of experience between us as editors of five publications focused on intervention research, and as a result, we are frequently given a chance to compare cutting-edge and established techniques used in intervention research (Journal of Writing Research, Exceptional Children, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Archives of Scientific Psychology - Section for Educational and School Psychology, and Journal of Educational Psychology). The earlier study on improving educational intervention research by Pressley and Harris (1994a, 1994b) and Pressley, Graham, and Harris (2005) offers a framework for considering how to improve intervention research in writing more specifically.
 We first discuss the relevance of this study before outlining our suggestions for planning, conducting, and reporting better writing intervention research. Before we go any further, you must be made aware that the author's research largely backs some of the claims mentioned in this article. This article is not intended to downplay the important contribution made by other writers' research scholars. Instead, it uses the elements that we are most comfortable with to help us support and build upon our main beliefs. Why Is It Important to Carry Out High-Quality Research on Writing Interventions?
Read full abstract