Better science through rhetoric: A new model and pilot program for training graduate student science writers

Druschke, Caroline Gottschalk; Reynolds, Nedra; Morton-Aiken, Jenna; Lofgren, Ingrid E.; Karraker, Nancy E.; McWilliams, Scott R.

doi:10.1080/10572252.2018.1425735

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most programs are aimed at oral communication, and can include media training with journalists, or storytelling exercises (see, e.g., StoryCollider.org, StoryCirclesTraining.com). However, written elements intended to improve science communication, such as message distillation (e.g., message boxing; Baron, 2010; COMPASS, 2017) are often included, and there are formal programs aimed at writing about science for the public (e.g., Druschke et al, 2018). One well-known training program incorporates acting improvisation (AldaCenter.org), while others include exercises in using dance, visual arts, and poetry to communicate scientific information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment by Audiences Shows Little Effect of Science Communication Training

Rubega

Burgio

MacDonald

et al. 2020

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the science community has recognized the vital role of communicating to the public, science communication training has proliferated. The development of rigorous, comparable approaches to assessment of training has not kept pace. We conducted a fully controlled experiment using a semester-long science communication course, and audience assessment of communicator performance. Evaluators scored the communication competence of trainees and their matched, untrained controls, before and after training. Bayesian analysis of the data showed very small gains in communication skills of trainees, and no difference from untrained controls. High variance in scores suggests little agreement on what constitutes “good” communication.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment by Audiences Shows Little Effect of Science Communication Training

Rubega

Burgio

MacDonald

et al. 2020

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Past research with non-native English-speaking international students in higher education has revealed that their language skills improve with more interaction and collaboration with native English-speaking students and more instructor support and feedback (Cheng, 2013; Lin and Scherz, 2014; Angelova and Zhao, 2016; Yu et al, 2016; Shi et al, 2017). In fact, a National Science Foundation-funded programme for STEM graduate students recommends a communication programme grounded in the three core principles of habitual writing, multiple genres, and frequent reviews (Druschke et al, 2018). Therefore, it is not surprising that the PG2 group, who are not as proficient in the English language, prefer more practice and teamwork as well as more feedback and support from their instructors and peers.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Training science graduate students in scientific writing and communication has been highlighted by the National Science Foundation and Council of Graduate Schools in the United States as a critical gap to be filled (Linton, 2013). Furthermore, Druschke et al (2018) recommended an emphasis on rhetoric in scientific writing and communication pedagogy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication Needs of Science Graduate Students

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graduate programmes in most universities are typically oriented towards training students to master their disciplinary studies and communication skills courses are often offered as add-on courses that rarely take into consideration students’ needs. The needs of graduate students can vary depending on their educational backgrounds and English language proficiency and as such, it is important to conduct a needs analysis to ensure that these courses cater to the needs of both proficient and less-proficient speakers of English. Using focus-group interviews, this study was conducted to examine the communication needs of local and international graduate students at a university in Singapore. More specifically, the objectives were to investigate the communication tasks prioritized by science graduate students, their communication needs and difficulties, as well as the help they would need through communication skills courses at the university. The findings suggest that the needs of the students vary depending on their proficiency in English. Those with higher proficiency aspire to master a repertoire of academic genres and higher-order language skills whereas those with lower proficiency require more help with lower-order language skills as well as more peer and professor support.

show abstract

“…Institutions in the United States and Europe, such as the National Science Foundation, Council of Graduate Schools, and the European Commission, have recently called for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) graduate programs to incorporate more communication training to better prepare future scientists to communicate to a variety of audiences (Linton, 2013;Kuehne et al, 2014;Druschke et al, 2018;Costa et al, 2019). Such calls for better science communication training for future scientists are driven by the realization that scientists should be involved in effectively conveying scientific information to a broad cross-section of society (Roux et al, 2006;Nisbet and Scheufele, 2009;Meyer et al, 2010;Smith et al, 2013;Taylor and Kedrowicz, 2013;Kuehne and Olden, 2015;National Research Council, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training Graduate Students in Multiple Genres of Public and Academic Science Writing: An Assessment Using an Adaptable, Interdisciplinary Rubric

Harrington

Lofgren

Druschke

et al. 2021

Front. Environ. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an urgent need for scientists to improve their communication skills with the public, especially for those involved in applying science to solve conservation or human health problems. However, little research has assessed the effectiveness of science communication training for applied scientists. We responded to this gap by developing a new, interdisciplinary training model, “SciWrite,” based on three central tenets from scholarship in writing and rhetoric: 1) habitual writing, 2) multiple genres for multiple audiences, and 3) frequent review and created an interdisciplinary rubric based on these tenets to evaluate a variety of writing products across genres. We used this rubric to assess three different genres written by 12 SciWrite-trained graduate science students and 74 non-SciWrite-trained graduate science students at the same institution. We found that written work from SciWrite students scored higher than those from non-SciWrite students in all three genres, and most notably thesis/dissertation proposals were higher quality. The rubric results also suggest that the variation in writing quality was best explained by the ability of graduate students to grasp higher-order writing skills (e.g., thinking about audience needs and expectations, clearly describing research goals, and making an argument for the significance of their research). Future programs would benefit from adopting similar training activities and goals as well as assessment tools that take a rhetorically informed approach.

show abstract

Better science through rhetoric: A new model and pilot program for training graduate student science writers

Cited by 24 publications

References 45 publications

Assessment by Audiences Shows Little Effect of Science Communication Training

Assessment by Audiences Shows Little Effect of Science Communication Training

Communication Needs of Science Graduate Students

Training Graduate Students in Multiple Genres of Public and Academic Science Writing: An Assessment Using an Adaptable, Interdisciplinary Rubric

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About