Purpose: Students with learning disabilities (LD) often struggle to initiate writing tasks and have difficulty devoting sufficient resources to complete written compositions. Educators must determine the most effective writing instruction to help these students. Evidence-based educational practices benefit from research reviews such as systematic reviews (SRs) and metaanalyses (MAs). However, not all SRs and MAs are conducted with utmost rigor. The purpose of this project was to examine existing reviews of writing instruction for students with LD, appraise their methodologic quality, and summarize findings. Methods: Following an extensive search of 10 databases, we identified two SRs and four MAs that summarized evidence for writing instruction for students with LD. Four trained examiners evaluated the quality of those reviews with an appraisal tool, the Evidence in Augmentative and Alternative Communication Systematic Review Scale. We extracted critical elements summarizing findings of each review. Results: One article met standards of methodologic rigor. While search methods were well-described across reviews, rigor in data extraction and analyses were lacking. The reviewed studies identified strategy instruction as the most effective approach to improve writing for students with LD. Conclusions: Evidence suggests explicit instruction and goal-setting approaches may benefit students with LD who demonstrate writing difficulties. Findings suggest the need for increased rigor when conducting these reviews to optimize evidence-based writing interventions for students with LD.