Providing students with opportunities to review previously taught letters is an important part of handwriting instruction. Prior research on handwriting instruction, including research conducted with the Iowa Reading Research Center’s print handwriting materials, highlights the importance of reviewing previously taught letters and composing letters in the context of words and sentences to support learning over time (Andrews et al., 2026; Limpo & Graham, 2020).
The IRRC’s LIFTER (Letter Identification and Formation for Transcription and Early Reading) and CLIFTER (Cursive Letter Identification and Formation for Transcription and Early Reading) resources provide educators and caregivers with tools to support students’ handwriting and broader literacy skills. The center’s new Cumulative Review handout and accompanying teacher materials extend LIFTER and CLIFTER learning by providing opportunities for students to review previously taught letters. This blog post provides guidance on how educators can use these new resources in their classroom.
Implementing the IRRC’s Cumulative Review Handout
When implementing Cumulative Review, educators first select three letters for review. These should be three letters that have been previously taught. In addition, educators will select three words that include only previously taught letters to provide students with word-level writing practice. The Cumulative Review handout includes suggested phonetically regular, decodable words (i.e., words that contain previously learned grapheme-phoneme correspondences) that align with LIFTER and CLIFTER’s systematic scope and sequence, but educators are encouraged to select any words that fit their instructional needs.
Letter and Word ReviewPart 1Letter 1: _____ Letter 2: _____ Letter 3: _____ |
In Part 1 of the Cumulative Review handout, teachers will prompt students to record the three letters selected for review at the top of the page. Teachers and students will also practice saying the letter’s name and sound. Then, students practice writing each letter independently.
Unlike our other handouts for LIFTER and CLIFTER, the Cumulative Review handout does not include the use of visual cues for students. Without visual cues, students are required to test their ability to recall the formation of letters. This memory retrieval practice is integral to effective handwriting instruction and supports students’ handwriting fluency and broader writing skill development (Datchuk & Kubina, 2013; Santangelo & Graham, 2016).
Part 2Word 1: _____ Word 2: _____ Word 3: _____ |
In Part 2, students practice using the three review letters to write words. Teachers may use any words that coordinate with their literacy instruction; however, these words should only include letters that have been previously taught. For example, if educators are using the systematic scope and sequences for LIFTER and CLIFTER, word practice may include the following words.
Suggested Word Practice Following LIFTER Systematic Scope and Sequence
l | i | t | o | e |
|
| it lit
| lot
| let
|
a | n | s | r | p |
at tat
| tan net ten | sit sat
| ran rot
| trap past pit
|
h | f | c | d | g |
hop hit hat
| fan lift fast | cap cot can | dot rad dip | gap dog tag |
b | u | m | v | w |
bat big tub
| sun sat past | mop ham gum | vat vest | win wig west
|
y | x | k | z | j |
yip yes yup
| fox box
| kit skip
| zip zit | jet jot jam
|
q |
|
|
|
|
quit squid
|
|
|
|
|
Suggested Word Practice Following CLIFTER Systematic Scope and Sequence
i | t | s | r | u |
| it | sit | ris rit | us trust rust
|
w | c | a | o | g |
wit
twist | cut scut | at sat cat | cot cost sot
| rug cog grit |
d | q | e | h | f |
dog dug | quit squid | red wed
| hat hot
| fog gift
|
b | k | l | v | n |
bus grab drab | kit skit kip | leg belt weld
| vet vest
| not van glint
|
m | x | z | j | y |
mom gum | fox box
| zit zip
| jet jot jam
| yes yip yup
|
p |
|
|
|
|
pen tap
|
|
|
|
|
Integrating Cumulative Review With Literacy Instruction
First, the Cumulative Review handout can serve as a tool for formative assessment, or assessing student learning to track progress over time. Specifically, teachers can use the Cumulative Review handout to assess students’ ability to recall the formation of previously taught letters and determine whether additional instruction or practice is needed. In addition, because the Cumulative Review handout is fully customizable, teachers may also choose to individualize selection of review letters based on students’ needs.
Second, the Cumulative Review handout can be used to supplement spelling instruction. After all prerequisite letters have been taught, educators may choose to integrate spelling words into the Cumulative Review handout for additional practice. Spelling, like handwriting, is considered a transcription level writing skill that serves as a building block for more complex writing development (Berninger & Amtmann, 2003). Formal spelling instruction has been shown to support students' reading and writing development (Graham & Santangelo, 2014; McMaster et al., 2017) and has been integrated into handwriting instruction in previous research studies with positive outcomes for students (e.g., Limpo et al., 2020; Wolf et al., 2017).
Educators and caregivers can download the Cumulative Review handout and teacher materials for both LIFTER and CLIFTER on the “Assessment and Review” sections of our Handwriting Hub online. The hub also includes additional LIFTER and CLIFTER resources, including eLearning modules, downloadable worksheets, PD toolkits, and more.
References
Andrews, G. N., Dean, Z. J., Morin, L., West, D., & Burns, M. K. (in press). Effectiveness of systematic handwriting intervention with students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A repeated acquisition design. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities.
Berninger, V. W., & Amtmann, D. (2003). Preventing written expression disabilities through early and continuing assessment and intervention for handwriting and/or spelling problems: Research into practice. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, S. Graham, H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 345–363). Guilford Press.
Datchuk, S. M., & Kubina, R. M. (2013). A review of teaching sentence-level writing skills to students with writing difficulties and learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 34(3), 180–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932512448254
Graham, S., & Santangelo, T. (2014). Does spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review. Reading and Writing, 27(9), 1703–1743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9517-0
Limpo, T., & Graham, S. (2020). The role of handwriting instruction in writers’ education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68(3), 311–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2019.1692127
Limpo, T., Vigário, V., Rocha, R., & Graham, S. (2020). Promoting transcription in third-grade classrooms: Effects on handwriting and spelling skills, composing, and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101856. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101856
Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2016). A comprehensive meta-analysis of handwriting instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 225–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9335-1
Wolf, B., Abbott, R. D., & Berninger, V. W. (2017). Effective beginning handwriting instruction: Multi-modal, consistent format for 2 years, and linked to spelling and composing. Reading and Writing, 30(2), 299–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9674-4