Constructing engaged learning in Scientific Writing

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 292-307
Author(s):  
Christina A. Geithner ◽  
Alexandria N. Pollastro
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Pedagogical Strategies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Composite Scores

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to incorporate a blended pedagogical approach to Scientific Writing, and assess its effectiveness in improving students’ writing skills and scientific literacy. Effective writing is vital to the dissemination of scientific information and a critical skill for undergraduate science students. Various pedagogical strategies have been successful in improving writing skills and developing scientific literacy. Design/methodology/approach – Mean scores on draft and revision assignments were examined longitudinally (2013 cohort, n=51) and across cohorts (2011, 2012, and 2013; combined n=94). Domain-specific composite scores were calculated from survey items addressing students’ self-perceptions of knowledge (K), general and scientific writing skills (GWS and SWS), and attitudes (A) related to scientific literacy. Changes in composite scores were analyzed using paired t-tests, and cross-cohort differences were examined via MANOVAs (SPSS, p < 0.05). Findings – Mean scores on revisions following peer review and instructor feedback were significantly higher than those for drafts. Students ' perceptions of their K, GWS, SWS, and A increased significantly over the semester in the 2013 cohort, and were significantly higher in the 2013 cohort than those for the two earlier cohorts. Students identified peer reviews, revisions and other writing assignments, and literature searches as effective learning strategies. Research limitations/implications – One limitation of the study was that the authors lacked a control group for comparison. Pre-course survey data were only available for the 2013 cohort, and these data were incomplete, particularly with regard to perceptions of attitudes toward science and writing. Instructor feedback was not separated from that obtained through peer review. Thus, it was not possible to determine their respective impacts on students’ scores on revision assignments. Also, the number of writing assignments and peer reviews completed varied among the three cohorts enrolled in Scientific Writing. Practical implications – Using a blended approach to teaching scientific writing significantly improved students’ writing skills and enhanced their perceptions regarding their knowledge, skills, and abilities related to science and writing. Students identified peer reviews, writing abstracts, and outlining an Introduction as most helpful in improving their SWS. They identified the final peer review, the revision assignment of the Results section, literature searches, and poster presentations of research as most helpful in improving their scientific knowledge and understanding. Engaging students in a variety of pedagogical strategies was successful in achieving specific learning outcomes in an undergraduate human physiology course. Originality/value – The approach to peer review was more structured than those of previous studies. Engaging students with a variety of teaching and learning strategies improved both writing skills and scientific literacy in undergraduate human physiology.

Doing peer review and receiving feedback: impact on scientific literacy and writing skills

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina A. Geithner ◽  
Alexandria N. Pollastro
Keyword(s):  
Human Physiology ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Learning Activities ◽  
Self Rating ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Literacy And Writing ◽  
Composite Self

Doing peer review has been effectively implemented to help students develop critical reading and writing skills; however, its application in Human Physiology programs is limited. The purpose of the present study was to determine the impact of peer review on Human Physiology majors' perceptions of their scientific literacy and writing skills. Students enrolled in the Scientific Writing course completed multiple writing assignments, including three revisions after receiving peer and instructor feedback. Students self-assessed their knowledge, skills, and attitudes related to science and writing in pre- and postcourse surveys ( n = 26 with complete data). Seven survey items related to scientific literacy and writing skills impacted by peer review were selected for analysis. Scores on these survey items were summed to form a composite self-rating score. Responses to two questions regarding the most useful learning activities were submitted to frequency analysis. Mean postcourse scores for individual survey items and composite self-rating scores were significantly higher than precourse means ( P < 0.05). Peer review was the most frequently noted among 21 learning activities for increasing scientific literacy and in the top 5 for improving writing skills. In conclusion, peer review is an effective teaching/learning approach for improving undergraduate Human Physiology majors' knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding science and scientific writing.

Implementing Teaching Portfolios and Peer Reviews in Tax Courses

1999 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Calegari ◽  
Gregory G. Geisler ◽  
Ernest R. Larkins
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Public University ◽  
Written Feedback ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Extant Literature ◽  
Research Publications ◽  
Teaching Portfolio ◽  
Course Syllabus

Extant literature suggests that the process of constructing a teaching portfolio can identify areas to improve, motivate positive changes, and elevate the importance of teaching in academe. This study describes the experience of the tax faculty at a public university in using teaching portfolios and peer reviews to improve the quality of the first two tax courses. The type of teaching portfolio used in this project consists of a course syllabus and a reflective statement that documents the rationale for all components of a course (i.e., lectures, projects, exams, writing assignments, presentations, etc.). The peer review aspect involves written feedback from a colleague on this teaching portfolio. Though research publications are usually subject to extensive peer review, teaching generally is not. Like research, however, teaching can be evaluated and ultimately improved through peer review. Thus, this study can provide valuable guidance to tax professors attempting to improve their courses.

The influence of peer assessment training on assessment knowledge and reflective writing skill

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-875
Author(s):  
Bobby Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Student Assessment ◽  
Reflective Writing ◽  
Analysis Of Covariance ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Writing Skill ◽  
Assessment Training

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of peer-assessment training as a catalyst to enhance student assessment knowledge and the ability to effectively evaluate reflective journal writing assignments when using the online peer assessment (PA) tool Expertiza. Design/methodology/approach Over a two-year period, end-of-unit assessment test scores and reflective writing samples from a peer-assessment participation group were compared to a no peer-assessment control group. Analysis of covariance was used to control for existing writing skill and ongoing feedback on writing samples. Findings No significant increases were observed in student assessment knowledge when participating in peer-assessment training. Comparison of matched participant samples revealed that after controlling for existing writing skill, students participating in PA graded reflective writing assignments significantly lower than instructor-graded assessments from students not afforded peer-assessment participation. Research limitations/implications No distinction was made on the relative influence of giving or receiving PA influenced performance on the outcome measures. Second, students making multiple revisions based on feedback were not analyzed. Third, the Expertiza system does not control for the number of reviews performed, thus differential weighting of assessment outcomes may be realized unless all students submit and perform the same number of assessments. Finally, in absence of any qualitative analysis as to what factors students consider when grading writing samples, it is unknown as to how individual difference factors or adherence to scoring rubrics may have influenced the obtained results. Practical implications Students may be reticent evaluating peers or utilize grading criteria beyond the mandatory evaluation rubrics. Clear distinctions should be provided to students indicating how instructional content aligns with skills needed to conduct assessment. Training that addresses the theoretical and transactional components of PA are important, but teachers should recognize that when developing assessment skills learners undergo a developmental catharsis related to building trust and establishing a secure and comfortable identity as an assessor. Peer review systems should quantify the relative contribution of each reviewer through the measurement of frequency, timeliness and accuracy of the feedback, compared with instructor standards/evaluations. Originality/value This paper reduces the gap in the literature concerning how PA evolves over time and identifies factors related to the etiology of the peer-review process. In addition, the paper reveals new information regarding the calibration between instructor and peer evaluations.

Computer-Aided Peer Review of Writing

1999 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 87-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura MacLeod
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Computer Applications ◽  
Recent Survey ◽  
Business Writing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Client Software ◽  
Writing Class ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
News Groups

Classes that require writing assignments commonly engage students in some form of peer review. Such reviews can profit from two computer applications: news groups and specialized communication client software. In a recent survey, a majority of the students who conducted peer reviews in a business writing class found the activities useful and worthy of repeating in future semesters. But they suggested that faculty provide more guidelines and topics to enhance the substance of the review, train students more directly in the computer applications, and allot more time to conduct the reviews at a comfortable pace.

scholarly journals Conceptualization of Socioscientific Issues in Educational Practice from a Review of Research in Science Education

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 297-302
Author(s):  
S. Alcaraz-Dominguez ◽  
◽  
M. Barajas
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Scientific Literacy ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
Educational Practice ◽  
Socioscientific Issues ◽  
Educational Systems ◽  
Pedagogical Strategies ◽  
Practical Applications

The pedagogical use of Socioscientific Issues (SSI) in formal education has increased in the last decade, specifically as a way to improve STEM teaching processes and results. However, several theoretical interpretations coexist about SSI in formal education, thus posing a challenge to developing knowledge from practice. An examination of recent papers was conducted to elicit the conceptualizations of SSI in science education research according to three theoretical dimensions of the curriculum: purpose, contents, and teaching and learning strategies. Results show that as for purpose, SSI is currently conceptualized as citizenship education, and scientific literacy or competence. As for contents, SSI is related both to knowledge of science and knowledge about science, as well as some skills such as argumentation. Finally, SSI is associated to pedagogical strategies, mainly Inquiry-Based Learning; and to pedagogical techniques such as dilemmas and group discussions. This conceptualization sets up foundations for the design and evaluation of innovative SSI educational practices. It shall also help to promote new lines of research that establish connections among practical applications of SSI in different subjects, cultural contexts, and educational systems.

scholarly journals The Utility of Writing Assignments in Undergraduate Bioscience

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Libarkin ◽  
Gabriel Ording
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Human Activities ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Critical Thought ◽  
Complete Development ◽  
Student Ability ◽  
Writing Scores ◽  
Insufficient Number

We tested the hypothesis that engagement in a few, brief writing assignments in a nonmajors science course can improve student ability to convey critical thought about science. A sample of three papers written by students (n = 30) was coded for presence and accuracy of elements related to scientific writing. Scores for different aspects of scientific writing were significantly correlated, suggesting that students recognized relationships between components of scientific thought. We found that students' ability to write about science topics and state conclusions based on data improved over the course of three writing assignments, while the abilities to state a hypothesis and draw clear connections between human activities and environmental impacts did not improve. Three writing assignments generated significant change in student ability to write scientifically, although our results suggest that three is an insufficient number to generate complete development of scientific writing skills.

TEACHING PEER REVIEW AND THE PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H. Guilford
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
Scientific Publishing ◽  
Writing Assignments ◽  
Publishing Process ◽  
Detailed Method ◽  
Term Paper ◽  
The University

Many undergraduate and graduate students understand neither the process of scientific writing nor the significance of peer review. In response, some instructors have created writing assignments that teach or mimic parts of the scientific publishing process. However, none fully reproduced peer review and revision of papers together with the writing and publishing process from research to final, accepted draft. In addition, most have been instituted at the graduate rather than undergraduate level. We present a detailed method for teaching undergraduate students the full scientific publishing process, including anonymous peer review, during the process of writing a “term paper.” The result is a review article in the format for submission to a major scientific journal. This method has been implemented in the course Cell and Molecular Biology for Engineers at the University of Virginia. Use of this method resulted in improved grades, much higher quality in the final manuscript, greater objectivity in grading, and improved understanding of the importance of peer review.

scholarly journals The use of a guided peer review assessment for investigative interviewers of child witnesses

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja P. Brubacher ◽  
Martine B. Powell ◽  
Linda C. Steele ◽  
David Boud
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Child Witnesses ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Self Development ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Learning Data

Purpose Investigative interviewers assess their colleagues' interviews (‘peer review’) as a necessary part of their practice, and for their self-development. Yet, there is little guidance around what the process involves and how they might do it. Research suggests that effective peer review is supported by using guidance material. The goal of the present work was to describe the use of such a guide by a group of professionals who regularly conduct investigative interviews with children, to share what was learned with other professionals seeking to create a formalized peer review process. Design/methodology/approach Sixty US child witness interviewers completed a guided peer review assessment of an anonymous interview, as an assignment at the conclusion of an 18-hour training program that focused on developing their interviewing skills. They consented to the use of their learning data in research, and the research was approved by the university's research ethics board. Peer reviews were coded for the extent to which they used the guide to support their evaluations, and the overall quality of the review to assess the utility of the guide in supporting them to conduct effective assessments. Findings In general, the guide and instructions for providing feedback were moderately effective in supporting the peer assessments, but results suggested specific training in how to deliver peer review would be useful. Practical implications Through this process, the authors identified components that would be helpful to further increase the efficacy of peer review. Originality/value The aim of this work was to spark a greater conversation among practitioners and academics about professionalizing the peer review process and aiding interviewers to develop peer review tools that would support their continued growth. The authors conclude with five key tips for professionals that stem from the experiences creating and evaluating the guide in combination with existing literature and three areas for future investigation.

A Study of Medical Board Peer Reviews in Nevada

2010 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-29
Author(s):  
Jerry C. Calvanese
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Study Objective ◽  
Clark County ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Medical Examiners ◽  
Washoe County ◽  
Total Average Cost ◽  
Total Average

ABSTRACT Study Objective: The purpose of this study was to obtain data on various characteristics of peer reviews. These reviews were performed for the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners (NSBME) to assess physician licensees' negligence and/or incompetence. It was hoped that this data could help identify and define certain characteristics of peer reviews. Methods: This study examined two years of data collected on peer reviews. The complaints were initially screened by a medical reviewer and/or a committee composed of Board members to assess the need for a peer review. Data was then collected from the peer reviews performed. The data included costs, specialty of the peer reviewer, location of the peer reviewer, and timeliness of the peer reviews. Results: During the two-year study, 102 peer reviews were evaluated. Sixty-nine percent of the peer-reviewed complaints originated from civil malpractice cases and 15% originated from complaints made by patients. Eighty percent of the complaint physicians were located in Clark County and 12% were located in Washoe County. Sixty-one percent of the physicians who performed the peer reviews were located in Washoe County and 24% were located in Clark County. Twelve percent of the complaint physicians were in practice in the state for 5 years or less, 40% from 6 to 10 years, 20% from 11 to 15 years, 16% from 16 to 20 years, and 13% were in practice 21 years or more. Forty-seven percent of the complaint physicians had three or less total complaints filed with the Board, 10% had four to six complaints, 17% had 7 to 10 complaints, and 26% had 11 or more complaints. The overall quality of peer reviews was judged to be good or excellent in 96% of the reviews. A finding of malpractice was found in 42% of the reviews ordered by the medical reviewer and in 15% ordered by the Investigative Committees. There was a finding of malpractice in 38% of the overall total of peer reviews. The total average cost of a peer review was $791. In 47% of the peer reviews requested, materials were sent from the Board to the peer reviewer within 60 days of the original request and 33% took more than 120 days for the request to be sent. In 48% of the reviews, the total time for the peer review to be performed by the peer reviewer was less than 60 days. Twenty seven percent of the peer reviews took more than 120 days to be returned. Conclusion: Further data is needed to draw meaningful conclusions from certain peer review characteristics reported in this study. However, useful data was obtained regarding timeliness in sending out peer review materials, total times for the peer reviews, and costs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document