Writing Science: Transforming Students’ Science Writing by Tapping into Writing Instruction Scholarship and Best Practices

Abstract

Instructors at most career levels can agree there is irony in our expectations of students’ writing abilities. While we want our students to write well, and often bemoan their abilities, relatively few of us actually teach writing skills (Guilford 20012001, Robertson 20042004, Reynolds and Thompson 20112011). The real paradox, according to Reynolds and Thompson, is that while writing and associated communication skills are fundamental to most careers in ecology, “the teaching of writing is not central to science education” (Reynolds and Thompson 20112011). Few undergraduate biology courses “make explicit what most scientists agree […] that comprehension of primary scientific papers and communication of scientific concepts are two of the most important skills” students must learn (Brownell et al. 20132013). It would be easy to blame the lack of writing instruction in science courses on associated instructional challenges, but there are likely more straightforward reasons why ecologists do not emphasize writing skill development in their courses: Lack of experience teaching writing; Limited instruction in the pedagogy of teaching writing; and/or Reluctance to prioritize writing over course content (including thinking writing is not applicable to the course). Bean (20112011), an academic, consultant, and writing program administrator, adds to the list: More writing means more grading; and The perception that writing instruction requires grammar and writing expertise. In 2011, Bean published Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom . In it, he productively counters these reasons for reluctance on the part of academic educators. The rest of this article will focus on some of the highlights from Engaging Ideas and associated scholarship that may be most immediately valuable to university science instructors. A rarity in a market flooded with books advising on how to become a better writer, Engaging Ideas emphasizes how to become a better writing instructor. In the early chapters, Bean outlines the research and theory underpinning current best practices in writing pedagogy and the scholarship of rhetoric and composition. The rest of Engaging Ideas is an immensely accessible, cross‐curricular, writing instruction how‐to book. It is also one specifically calibrated for the busy academic instructor. Consistent with current research on science writing instruction (and writing instruction more generally), Bean takes a “writing across the curriculum” approach which (1) discredits many of the myths obstructing science‐related writing instruction efforts and (2) provides accessible and actionable recommendations for how we can enhance science learning through writing skill development in our own classrooms. Bean has taught and studied cross‐disciplinary writing since 1976, and his tone is collegial and reasonable. He acknowledges, and is intimately familiar with, the challenges facing instructors throughout academia. His book is an explicit invitation to collaborate on the important work of developing students who can think and write critically. Bean's invitation is well‐founded and timely. Results of a recent, informal, non‐representative poll of readers of a well‐regarded ecology blog bear this out (Merkle 20182018). Of 97 respondents, 77% (75/97) feel they should teach writing more than they do. Perhaps surprisingly, small class sizes, advanced courses, and TA availability were not the primary reasons people do not teach writing. However, other time‐based reasons were as follows: Lack of time for grading time‐intensive assignments (70%; 42/60) was the dominant reason, along with lack of time to support students (60%; 36/60). Lack of writing instruction (30%; 18/60) followed.