1. WRITING-TO-LEARN IN STEM Julie Reynolds Duke University July 2012

2. Why should scientists teach writing? What works? What do we know? How do you study the impact of WTL?

3. PART 1: WHY SHOULD SCIENTISTS TEACH WRITING?

4. WTL pedagogies can Deepen conceptual understanding Reveal misconceptions Acculturate students into discipline Increase retention But….

5. WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS TO WTL IN STEM?

6. MYTH #1: STEM FACULTY DON’T CARE ABOUT WRITING What evidence do we have that faculty don’t care?

7. MYTH 2: Writing isn’t integral to STEM do research formulate problems plan and execute experiments analyze data drawconclusions write it up

8. Scientist & Engineers always write do research formulate problems experiments analyze data draw conclusions write it! Letters and emails Drafts Lab notebooks Incorporate reviewer’s comments Re-write for another audience Drafts submit manuscript Grant proposals

9. …but are our STEM students? First-year writing “W” course

10. MYTH 3: IT’S THE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT’S JOB….

11. Scientific writing ability = f(?) # of undergrad English courses? years at University? exposure to sci writing in other courses? prior experience writing a scientific paper? Jerde CL, Taper ML. 2004. Preparing undergraduates for professional writing: evidence supporting the benefits of science writing within the biology curriculum. Journal of College Science Teaching 33: 33-37.

12. MYTH 4: “BUT I CAN’T TEACH WRITING!”

13. Writing is visible thinking WTL LTW X vs

14. MYTH #5: A FEW WID COURSES ARE ENOUGH Quality practice

15. Writing task (and associated learning outcomes) 1 st year Pre- & Co- Requisites Core Course Cap- stone seminar Honor thesis Abstracts and summaries Lab notebooks, etc. Laboratory reports Op-eds/opinion pieces Research proposal Thesis, manuscript, book chapter ? ?? ?

16. Writing task 1 st year Pre- & Co- Requisites Core Course Cap- stone seminar Honor thesis Abstracts and summaries Lab notebooks, etc. Laboratory reports Op-eds/opinion pieces Research proposal Thesis, manuscript, book chapter

17. MYTH 6: MORE ASSIGNMENTS WILL IMPROVE WRITING Students will figure it out

18. Take Home Messages Writing-to-learn pedagogies are under-utilized in STEM courses Stem faculty can and should use writing to teach Student need opportunities to practice disciplinary writing Skill development occurs over time Skills do not improve automatically Writing assignments need to be carefully constructed, using full rhetorical context, structured opportunities for feedback (including peer review) Modeling disciplinary ways of thinking socializes students into the discipline Bowman MH, Stage FK. 2002. Personalizing the Goals of Undergraduate Research: Implementing Three Types of Goals. Journal of College Science Teaching 32: 120-125.

19. PART 2: WHAT WORKS? WHAT DO WE KNOW?

20. WTL Working group Biology = 2 Chemistry = 3 Education = 1 Engineering = 2 Physics = 1 Psychology = 1 Writing = 2 Workshop = 80 STEM faculty

21. Table 1: Key citations from the WTL in STEM bibliographic database that represent exemplary descriptive studies, empirically validated studies, and promising practices. The database, of 324 sources, can be searched by keywords. http://bit.ly/fjudgo Julie A. Reynolds, Christopher Thaiss, Robert J. Thompson, Jr, and Wendy Katkin, 2012. Writing-To-Learn in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A “bottom-up” approach to developing and adopting effective practices, CBE - Life Science Education Vol. 11, 17–25.

22. . Biology/ Life Sciences ChemistryEngineering Math/Computer Science/ Statistics Physics/ Earth Sciences Content knowledge Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Conceptual understanding Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Scientific method Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Critical thinking Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Effective communication Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Metacognition Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Professionalization Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone

23. Biology/ Life Sciences ChemistryEngineering Math/Computer Science/ Statistics Physics/ Earth Sciences Content knowledge Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Conceptual understanding Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Scientific method Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Critical thinking Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Effective communication Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Metacognition Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Professionalization Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone Intro Advanced Capstone

24. Reconceptualize the role of writing in improving learning Delineate specific learning objectives Determine “mechanisms of effect” Focus on critical reflection and argumentation Adopt a “hybrid paradigm” for studies Establish multi-university collaborative initiatives

25. Future efforts must be informed by: theory and research on WTL science of teaching and learning Constructivism  beliefs, prior knowledge, and frameworks for interpretation Metacognition  focus on sense-making, self-assessment, and reflection during learning Metacognition  regulates cognition, emotions, and motivation Neurocognitive development learning changes the physical structure and functional organization of the brain ongoing remodeling of the brain throughout college year

26. Research template What is the role of ___________________ in improving ________________________________ through impacting _______________________________ as a function of _______________________________ ? [specific practice] [disciplinary specific learning objective] [specific cognitive, motivational, emotional process; prior knowledge; beliefs] [course level, class size; discipline; level, background, and goals of the student; and institutional factors]

28. PART 3: HOW DO YOU STUDY THE IMPACT OF WTL?

29. Discourse analysis of texts Rubric Rater training and calibration Inter-rater reliability

33. Writing process Guidelines for students Guidelines for faculty Timeline for revision Cover letters Response to feedback Structured comments Reader-based feedback Timely feedback Multiple revisions Peer review

34. Rubric Quality of research Critical thinking skills Writing skills

35. NoSomewhat (Minimum Acceptable Standards) Yes (Standards of Excellence) Is the writing appropriate for the target audience? Honors theses should address non- specialist readers with an understanding of basic biology— specifically, any faculty member in the biology department regardless of sub-discipline. Although faculty are experts within their field of research, they are rarely familiar with the language and conceptual nuances of other highly-specialized fields of study. Students should assume their readers understand basic biological processes, but they cannot assume that readers readily remember all the details. Therefore, students should limit their use of jargon, and should explain or define all key terms and concepts that are specific to their sub-field. The thesis is written with excessive jargon or is greatly lacking in definitions and explanations, making the research inaccessible to non-specialist readers. The thesis includes some useful definitions or explanations, but some key terms or concepts are still challenging for the non- specialist reader. Non- specialist readers are able to follow the main themes of the thesis, but the writer has not made this task easy. The thesis has sufficient definitions and explanations to make the research accessible and engaging to non- specialist readers