This study investigated the effects of a structured procedure for collaborative writing (Paired Writing) on the quality of creative writing and attitudes to writing in 8‐year‐old children. Each of two classes featured an experimental collaborative writing group and a control group, which produced writing individually. In one class the experimental group collaborated in different‐ability pairs with fixed roles as helper and writer; in the other class, in same‐ability pairs reciprocating roles. The 8 week project involved training for the participating children. Analyses were made of quality of individual writing before and after the project and of collaborative writing during the project. Pre‐post gains in individual writing were statistically significant for the cross‐ability experimentals but not for their controls. Pre and post scores for same‐ability experimentals were not significantly different, nor for their controls. However, the same‐ability experimentals improved while their controls deteriorated, and the difference in gain between experimentals and controls was significant. Also, the collaborative writing of same‐ability pairs scored significantly higher than their pre‐project individual writing, although this was not the case for cross‐ability pairs. Both types of Paired Writers reported finding the method easy to use and a majority showed positive attitudes to it. It was concluded that both formats of Paired Writing could be effective. However, ensuring short term gains for the more able helpers in cross‐ability pairs could be problematic. Further research is needed, including trials of cross‐ability reciprocal role pairing.