When one considers science writing in undergraduate classrooms, the formal lab report is generally the first thing that comes to mind. However, mastering this genre is of little benefit to non-majors, who are unlikely ever to encounter, read, or write a scientific research report beyond the confines of a science course. In addition, most undergraduates are completely unaware that a scientist's research report is the product of a range of informal writing that happened along the way (scribbles in a notebook, notes in the margins of papers, presentations at lab meetings and conferences, e-mails to colleagues, etc.). Therefore, this project asks: How can science instructors engage undergraduates in authentic writing and literacy practices that offer skills that can be leveraged in settings beyond the science classroom? Can students eventually develop the academic language, precision, inscriptions, and argumentation patterns common to communication in professional scientific research and science writing communities without relying on the lab report as the only model? How can science instructors, who rarely receive any training in writing instruction, be better prepared to teach students to write well in science?
Building on prior work done under a CCLI Type 1 grant (NSF Award No. 0837058, "Student-Generated Scientific Inquiry"), this project is addressing the above-mentioned questions and challenges by partnering science and English faculty to improve instruction in an inquiry course for future K-8 teachers and to develop an instructor's guide, "Writing in the Inquiry Classroom: A Facilitator's Guide to Scientific Writing," for use by science faculty. The instructor's guide will provide concrete pedagogical strategies for implementing best practices in writing instruction within the context of any undergraduate course where students engage in scientific inquiry.
In addition, the project is analyzing the authenticity of students' discourse patterns compared with those found in professional communities of scientists. For example, do students use notebooks and diagrams like scientists do? Do they develop precision in their use of language? Do they use writing as a tool for learning, not just as a demonstration of what was learned?
The investigators are employing a mixed-methods evaluation, drawing from data sources including videotapes of class sessions, copies of students' written work, lesson plans, teaching logs, students' online discussions, surveys, and student interviews.
