Bernstein, D. & Greenhoot, A.F. Team-designed improvement of writing and critical thinking in large undergraduate courses. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 2(1), pp. 39-61.

The development of advanced critical thinking, research, and writing skills is a challenge in large undergraduate classes. In order to address the enhancement of these skills, the researchers conducted a three-year project utilizing team course design and based on a cognitive apprenticeship model. The project was conducted in courses with enrollments ranging from 70 to over 400 students. Over the course of the project, partnerships were established between the faculty and specialists from the university library, writing center, and teaching center. Graduate student fellows who had received supplemental training also partnered with the faculty. Progressive learning activities and written assignments based on meaningful, situated critical thinking scenarios were developed through these partnerships. Rubrics were developed and used to track student progress through each step of the process; information obtained was used to inform the next wave of course enhancements and generate continual and iterative improvement. Results from the project demonstrated an improvement in critical thinking and writing skills in students enrolled in the team-designed courses from beginning to end of the semester. Students were also shown to display more advanced critical thinking and writing skills as compared to students enrolled in conventionally designed courses. The results of this study found utilizing a team design approach involving specialists and graduate students to be a feasible and worthwhile strategy for engaging faculty in designing and developing advanced instructional and assessment designs which serve to enhance high-end learning in a large university setting.

Conrad, S. (Portland State University), Pfeiffer, Timothy James, Foundation Engineering, Inc., and Szymoniak, T. (Portland State University). Preparing Students for Writing in Civil Engineering Practice (AC 2012-3661)

This paper describes a project designed to investigate characteristics of effective writing
in civil engineering practice and improve writing instruction for students. The project
analyzes documents written by civil engineering practitioners and compares them to
papers written by undergraduate students in civil engineering classes. A major finding of
the project has been that practitioners and students exhibit a fundamentally different view
of writing: practitioners see writing as integrated with engineering content and practice,
whereas students view writing as separate from engineering. In this paper, we present
three cases studies that illustrate the empirical analyses that have led to this finding,
focusing on organization, sentence structure, and grammatical errors. We then offer five
specific suggestions for approaching writing in civil engineering classes so that students
will be better prepared for writing in the workplace, discussing how these ideas have
been implemented at the university where the project is based.

The three cases are: 1) organization of tech memos; 2) complexity of sentence structure;
and 3) grammatical errors. The cases present a picture of practitioner writing as having
predictable, linear organization, simple sentence structure but detailed noun and
prepositional phrases, and few grammatical errors. These characteristics are related to
presenting accurate, precise information as unambiguously and predictably as possible,
and to giving the firm as professional an image as possible. In other words, these
concerns are directly tied to engineering practice; they combine basic engineering
concerns for accuracy and precision with practice concerns of meeting clients’ needs and
limiting liability. In addition, the cases present a very different picture of student writing.
It has less predictable, less linear organization, complicated sentence structure with more
embedding, and many grammatical errors. These characteristics lead to less accuracy and
precision, and more ambiguity. Because of their greater ambiguity, they would likely lead
to unintended liability for a firm. They also make information harder for readers to find
and are likely to give an impression of unpolished work.

We should not expect students to take composition or general technical writing courses,
and make the jump to using writing skills in the civil engineering workplace. Rather, civil
engineering courses need to take an active role in developing writing expertise that
reflects values within civil engineering practice, including precision, accuracy,
consistency, and professionalism.

Holmes, Richard. “Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines.” English for Specific Purposes 16.4 (1997): 321-337. (link)

This research article focuses on the genre of Research Article (RA) within the social sciences (as opposed the natural sciences). The approach of the article is to compare the Discussion sections among various published research articles hailing from political science, sociology, and history. The authors note that there is a gap in studying the genre RA outside the natural sciences, so this is an effort to address this gap. The methods were to apply a “framework” containing typical attributes found within RA discussion sections. The analysis was to compare and contrast the differences in these attributes across these several disciplines. The authors found that the social science Discussion sections of RAs had similarities with the natural sciences, but enough differences to justify the a natural science RA genre and a social science RA genre. In addition, within the social sciences, the authors found the Discussion sections within the discipline of History to markedly differ on important attributes. For example, in History journal articles, summary of analyzed empirical results were not provided prominent attention relative to political science articles. The authors argue that there ought to be a “sub-genre” for History RAs. The conclusion that the authors arrive is that the teaching of writing within the social science ought to be sensitive to the students’ disciplines. That is, the teaching to history students, for example, ought not to stress a heavy reliance on summary of empirical findings in the Discussion section; the use of ‘generic’ social science teaching materials and examples may be adequate for political science and sociology students, but may not be appropriate for history students.

Jenkins, S., Jordan, M. K., & Weiland, P. O. (1993). The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices. English for Specific Purposes 12(1), 51-67.

The increasing number of science and technology graduate students in ESP writing courses has encouraged debate about the timing, content, and proper locus of such courses. This article analyzes questionnaire data from faculty at six engineering schools to determine the role of writing in graduate engineering programs and its implications for the design of writing courses. Attitudes and beliefs of the faculty about the importance of writing skills, and their practices to ensure that graduate students become proficient writers were compared, and pedagogical implications discussed.

Roth, S. M. (2014). Improving Teaching Effectiveness and Student Learning Through the Use of Faculty Learning Communities. Kinesiology Review, 3(4), 209-216.

Higher education faculty have many responsibilities, with teaching as arguably the most public of those yet also the task for which many are least prepared. Professional development around teaching and learning can provide faculty with the knowledge and skills needed to improve student learning while also improving job satisfaction. The present paper describes the use of faculty learning communities as a best practice for professional development around teaching. Such communities engage a group of participants over time and provide a way to impart knowledge and resources around teaching and learning, encourage application of new skills in the classroom, and evaluate and reflect on the effectiveness of those trials. Research shows that time spent in faculty learning communities translates into improvements in both teaching effectiveness and student learning. Resources are provided for administrators interested in developing and supporting faculty learning communities around teaching and learning (Abstract from author).