Teaching Science Writing in a Research University: Students’ Experiences vs. Faculty Expectations P. Hirsch 1, B. Yalvac 2, J. Cline 1, K. Carmichael 1, and J. Anderson 1 1 Northwestern University, 2 Texas A&M University AERA Conference Chicago, Illinois April 12, 2007

AERAApril 12, 2007  2  A problem in science education Faculty, industry, and government agree that science writing skills are increasingly important for science students. Many schools value science writing instruction and some mandate Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs. However, complaints in leading scientific journals suggest that science students still need more & better writing instruction*. * Aschwanden, C. (2006). Learning to lead. Cell, 125, * Emanuel, E. J. (2006). Changing premed requirements and the medical curriculum. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(9),

AERAApril 12, 2007  3  Purpose of this study Research Questions (1) What are the students’ experience and confidence levels in science writing? (2) To what extent do science faculty teach science writing, and what expectations do they have for thei rstudents? Research team Three writing faculty, a learning scientist, and a technology expert Setting A research university that values writing instruction but also departmental autonomy

AERAApril 12, 2007  4  Methods: part I-- collecting quantitative data from students Instrument: An online student survey (two versions) –To elicit information about students’ demographics, their science writing experience (on a 3 point scale), their comfort levels (on a 4 point scale), and future expectations (open ended) Participants: 30 students who took a science writing course offered by a writing program –Winter and Spring 2006 –Recruited in class Data collection: Pre and post survey –Students completed the online survey before and after each course –Data were collected online and stored in electronic form

AERAApril 12, 2007  5  Methods: part 2-- collecting qualitative data from faculty Instrument: A faculty interview protocol – Explored faculty expectations and the context for any science writing teaching – Included a few demographic questions and a semi-structured protocol Participants: 9 science faculty – All natural science departments represented – Recruited through recommendation by department chairs Data collection: One-on-one interview – Approximately one hour long – Conversations were tape-recorded

AERAApril 12, 2007  6  Analysis Quantitative survey data analyzed using SPSS –Descriptive statistics computed –Students’ experience (pre) and confidence levels (pre and post) were documented –Independent t-test analysis was performed to explore changes in confidence levels due to students’ course participation Qualitative interview data analyzed using constant comparative method –Common themes across faculty identified and documented –Faculty expectations and their science writing teaching context presented as an ongoing discussion –Departmental differences identified

AERAApril 12, 2007  7  Student Writing Experience (n=30)

AERAApril 12, 2007  8  Student Confidence Levels (n=30)

AERAApril 12, 2007  9  Faculty Interview Results Faculty consider the following to be crucial writing skills: –Synthesizing data from published papers –Reporting on peer-reviewed literature –Writing a lab report –Writing up results and observations –Creating a bibliography and citing sources properly Science faculty indicated significant interest in the development of new resources –To assist science faculty and graduate students in teaching science writing –To assist science students in developing science writing skills More than half the faculty interviewed voiced strong interest in collaborating with writing faculty to develop science writing resources

AERAApril 12, 2007  10  Discussion Findings point to a significant gap between faculty expectations and student experience –At the pre-survey the mean score for all students was “less than confident” (<3 out of 4) in all five areas that faculty value most:  Synthesizing data from published papers  Reporting on peer-reviewed literature  Writing a lab report  Writing up results and observations  Creating a bibliography and citing sources properly Courses in science writing can close the gap –At the post-survey the mean score for all students was “confident” (>3 out of 4) in all of these five areas.

AERAApril 12, 2007  11  Recommendations For science faculty –Stress the importance of science writing –Encourage students to take science writing classes and read well-written science articles –Collaborate with writing faculty to eliminate barriers to science writing instruction For writing program faculty –Offer stand-alone classes in science writing –Identify science writing instructional materials currently in use and disseminate them to science faculty –Offer workshops for new science faculty who will be teaching writing –Offer grant-writing workshops for undergraduate science majors