Camping in the Disciplines: Assessing the Effect of Writing Camps on Graduate Student Writers

Abstract

In the past ten years, an increasing number of universities have begun organizing writing "camps," or full-week immersion experiences, in an effort to address the increased need to support graduate student writing. Outside of anecdotes and testimonials, we have previously had very little data about these camps' success. This study, conducted over the course of three such camps, attempts to address this lack by measuring graduate student writing confidence levels and self-regulation efforts both before and after attendance. An analysis of our results suggests that writing camps that include process-oriented programming result in small but meaningful improvements in attitudes and behaviors that positively affect graduate student writing. Introduction As this special issue attests, over the last decade our field has seen an increase in the attention given to the unique writing challenges facing graduate students. Also within the last ten years, but not necessarily keeping step with emerging research into graduate writing challenges, we have seen graduate schools devoting more resources to supporting graduate students as writers, supplementing departmental training with interdisciplinary instruction and support. One significant innovation is the writing camp, a full-week immersion experience modeled on the "Dissertation Boot Camp" that began at the University of Pennsylvania in 2005 (Lee and Golde, 2013). Many schools across the country offer similar camps, often run by partnerships of graduate schools, writing centers, libraries, and other support units. Camp participants and administrators are generally positive about these writing immersion experiences, and there is extensive anecdotal evidence of these camps' positive results. However, with a few notable exceptions (Simpson, 2013), we have very little data about the success of these camps outside of anecdotes and testimonials. Still less is known about how these camps affect writers over the long term and whether their impact varies across the disciplines. This is partly because, in spite of the growing body of research into graduate student writing, we still lack sufficient data on the behaviors and attitudes of graduate student writers in general and on how these behaviors and attitudes typically differ across disciplines. This paper adds to the discussion of graduate student writing support by offering a report on ongoing research into the shortand long-term impact of writing camps. Our emerging results highlight important design considerations for the construction of effective graduate writing camps. This article begins with an overview of research on graduate student writing camps and the positive attitudes and behaviors about writing that we teach in our camps. We articulate our hypothesis that instruction regarding these behaviors and attitudes will make students more confident and better able to manage their writing process. In the following section, we describe the camps we hold and the study that Busl, Donnelly, and Capdevielle 2 we performed during our camps. The data for this study is drawn from several camps conducted over the mid-semester and summer breaks at a mid-sized private research university in the Midwest. Using surveys and focus groups to measure camp participants' writing behaviors and attitudes, we work to assess the shortand long-term impact of the camps on those behaviors and attitudes and to determine continuities and differences across disciplines. Working from a hypothesis that writing camps that offer programming can improve the soft skills required to complete a long-term project like a thesis or dissertation, we set out to measure graduate student writing confidence levels and self-regulation efforts both before and after attendance at a writing camp. In the Results section, we trace the trends we see emerging in our responses, suggesting that writing camps that teach students strategies for managing their writing processes result in small but meaningful improvements in student attitudes and behaviors. Students who attended such camps tended to feel less anxious when they sat down to write and felt more confident that they had the abilities and tools to complete the writing task at hand. We close this paper with suggestions for further research into systems of support for graduate student writing across the disciplines. Do Graduate Student Writing Camps Affect Attitudes and Behaviors? Graduate student writing camps are an innovation in ongoing efforts to support graduate student writers, and accordingly there is currently little research, analysis, or theory devoted to them. Mastroieni and Cheung (2011) provide a broad survey and retrospective of these programs, while Smith and Kayongo (2011) explore the collaboration between libraries and other support units in terms of senior thesis writing camps. Lee and Golde (2013) offer the first analysis of writing camps, which they divide into two categories: "Just Write" camps and "Writing Process" camps. "Just Write" camps provide students with a physical space that is deemed conducive to writing. The theory behind these camps is that graduate students have the necessary skills and behaviors to write successfully, they simply need to be provided a dedicated time and space to actually get down to the business of writing. The location is quiet, has adequate table space, and provides sufficient power outlets for students to use laptops and other electronic devices. Students are provided with set hours during which they are encouraged to use this space, for example 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. every day for a week. In many of these camps, students are also provided with refreshments of some kind, such as breakfast and coffee in the morning and snack in the afternoon; some camps with enough funding also provide lunch. In "Just Write" camps, there is no specific instruction on writing or on the writing process. In contrast, "Writing Process" camps encourage "consistent and on-going conversations about writing" in addition to providing time and space (Lee and Golde, 2013). The theory behind these camps is that attendees have not fully mastered the skills and behaviors necessary to complete a dissertation or other long writing project. Consequently, these camps offer focused instruction on the writing process, for example on maintaining a dissertation log or on generative writing strategies to help overcome writer's block. They also frequently offer the services of a writing consultant or tutor. Lee and Golde strongly encourage a "Writing Process" orientation and the involvement of writing centers in graduate student writing camps. Simpson (2013) has also advocating the "Writing Process" camps. This is in part because he seeks to create "outwardfocused camps," or camps that are primarily a tool for developing writing initiatives across the university. Simpson has found that camps can serve as an important launching pad for deeper cross-campus involvement in writing and can draw graduate students into campus writing centers. While we also encourage "Writing Process" camps, this study is aimed at testing the hypothesis that processoriented camps are preferable to "Just Write" camps. We must assess if "Writing Process" camp participants are actually better able to manage the writing challenges they face, both during the camp and after it has ended. In particular, this study asks how the two models of writing camps improved graduate students' thoughts about writing and their behaviors as writers. In the realm of their thoughts about writing, we Camping in the Disciplines 3 considered their perceived self-efficacy and their motivation. Perceived self-efficacy in writing describes how confident a writer is that he or she will be able to complete a given writing task to the necessary standard. Perceived self-efficacy can be determined in part by past performances on similar tasks, but it can also account for differences in performance among individuals with similar abilities (Bandura, 1989). Educational psychologists argue that perceived self-efficacy influences motivation (Pret-Sala and Redford, 2010; Pret-Sala and Redford, 2012). Writers with higher perceived self-efficacy are more likely to persevere in the face of obstacles and to see them as challenges rather than roadblocks. They are also less likely to respond to failure with maladaptive behaviors. This may be why writers with high self-efficacy perform better than writers with low self-efficacy regardless of writing ability. In addition to examining students' thoughts about writing, we examined their writing behaviors. Specifically, we focused on their methods for self-regulation. Self-regulation is a set of behaviors that are correlated with self-efficacy and motivation (Zimmerman and Bandura, 1994; Pintrich, 1999). Selfregulated learners are diligent and resourceful; they tend to plan, set goals, and monitor their own progress towards achieving those goals (Zimmerman, 1990). In short, our study sought to determine whether writing camps affected perceived self-efficacy, motivation, and self-regulation in graduate student writers. In "Writing Process" camps, we teach specific behaviors that will help with self-regulation (e.g. maintaining a writing log, pre-scheduling writing times, setting short-term goals). We also foster cross-disciplinary discussion about writing and offer process-improvement tools that we hope will change students' levels of self-efficacy and motivation. For this reason, we hypothesize that students in "Writing Process" camps will increase their adaptive beliefs and behaviors while students in "Just Write" camps will not. Methodology This study examines graduate writing camps held at a mid-sized private research university in the Midwest. Since 2011, university entities such as the Library, the Writing Center, and the Graduate School have worked together to hold weeklong graduate writing camps during both fall and spring bre