获胜的方法:通过小组研讨会教授科学交流技能

Q2 Social Sciences
S. Gumusoglu, Maria Noterman Soulinthavong, Jennifer Barr
{"title":"获胜的方法:通过小组研讨会教授科学交流技能","authors":"S. Gumusoglu, Maria Noterman Soulinthavong, Jennifer Barr","doi":"10.18870/hlrc.v12i2.1342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Research almost always culminates in the communication of findings. Despite the necessity of grant and manuscript writing throughout academic careers, scientific trainees often receive little guided practice in written communication. To fill this gap, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a voluntary writing initiative for biomedical students at a research-intensive (R1) university in the midwestern United States called Writing Initiative in Neuroscience (WIN). Method: WIN consisted of didactic and workshop components. The didactic component included discussions with topic-specific experts on writing grants and manuscripts for the public and for non-academic scientific careers. The workshop component consisted of small group-based peer review of participant writing samples. Student self-enrollment consistently filled all available seats over three separate cohorts, including those formed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Student self-assessments were implemented to determine improvements quantitatively and qualitatively in writing and peer-review across 3 years of WIN programming. Results: Student self-assessment of writing skills before and after programming revealed improved scientific writing competency with medium or large effect sizes. Qualitative self-assessments indicated perceived improvements in writing competency and confidence. Collectively, students who participated in WIN improved their writing and communication skills and gained experience in providing and receiving feedback. Conclusions: Ultimately, peer-led writing initiatives, such as WIN, may enhance scholarly training and lay a foundation for future trainee writing success across scientific disciplines. Implications for Theory or Practice: These results support the utility of a student-centered writing workshop for biomedical students. Our study combined aspects of multiple existing resources, including peer feedback, interdisciplinary student backgrounds, and professional editing guidance. Together, these features formed a flexible and practical writing workshop, which can be used as a template for biomedical training programs.","PeriodicalId":37033,"journal":{"name":"Higher Learning Research Communications","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A WINning Approach: Teaching Science Communication Skills through Small-Group Workshops\",\"authors\":\"S. Gumusoglu, Maria Noterman Soulinthavong, Jennifer Barr\",\"doi\":\"10.18870/hlrc.v12i2.1342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: Research almost always culminates in the communication of findings. Despite the necessity of grant and manuscript writing throughout academic careers, scientific trainees often receive little guided practice in written communication. To fill this gap, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a voluntary writing initiative for biomedical students at a research-intensive (R1) university in the midwestern United States called Writing Initiative in Neuroscience (WIN). Method: WIN consisted of didactic and workshop components. The didactic component included discussions with topic-specific experts on writing grants and manuscripts for the public and for non-academic scientific careers. The workshop component consisted of small group-based peer review of participant writing samples. Student self-enrollment consistently filled all available seats over three separate cohorts, including those formed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Student self-assessments were implemented to determine improvements quantitatively and qualitatively in writing and peer-review across 3 years of WIN programming. Results: Student self-assessment of writing skills before and after programming revealed improved scientific writing competency with medium or large effect sizes. Qualitative self-assessments indicated perceived improvements in writing competency and confidence. Collectively, students who participated in WIN improved their writing and communication skills and gained experience in providing and receiving feedback. Conclusions: Ultimately, peer-led writing initiatives, such as WIN, may enhance scholarly training and lay a foundation for future trainee writing success across scientific disciplines. Implications for Theory or Practice: These results support the utility of a student-centered writing workshop for biomedical students. Our study combined aspects of multiple existing resources, including peer feedback, interdisciplinary student backgrounds, and professional editing guidance. Together, these features formed a flexible and practical writing workshop, which can be used as a template for biomedical training programs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Higher Learning Research Communications\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Higher Learning Research Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v12i2.1342\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Learning Research Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v12i2.1342","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:研究几乎总是在交流研究结果中达到高潮。尽管在整个学术生涯中都需要拨款和手稿写作,但科学实习生在书面交流方面通常很少得到指导实践。为了填补这一空白,我们为美国中西部一所研究密集型大学的生物医学学生设计、实施和评估了一项名为“神经科学写作倡议”(WIN)的自愿写作倡议。方法:WIN由教学和研讨会组成。教学部分包括与专题专家讨论为公众和非学术科学职业撰写赠款和手稿的问题。研讨会的组成部分包括对参与者写作样本的小组同行评审。学生自主招生始终占据了三个不同群体的所有可用席位,包括新冠肺炎大流行期间形成的群体。实施学生自我评估,以确定在WIN编程的3年中,在写作和同行评审方面的定量和定性改进。结果:学生在编程前后对写作技能的自我评估显示,科学写作能力有所提高,具有中等或较大的效果。定性的自我评估表明,写作能力和信心有所提高。总体而言,参加WIN的学生提高了他们的写作和沟通技能,并获得了提供和接收反馈的经验。结论:最终,同伴主导的写作计划,如WIN,可能会加强学术培训,并为未来实习生在科学学科中的写作成功奠定基础。对理论或实践的启示:这些结果支持生物医学学生以学生为中心的写作研讨会的实用性。我们的研究结合了多种现有资源的各个方面,包括同行反馈、跨学科学生背景和专业编辑指导。这些特征共同形成了一个灵活实用的写作研讨会,可以作为生物医学培训计划的模板。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A WINning Approach: Teaching Science Communication Skills through Small-Group Workshops
Objectives: Research almost always culminates in the communication of findings. Despite the necessity of grant and manuscript writing throughout academic careers, scientific trainees often receive little guided practice in written communication. To fill this gap, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a voluntary writing initiative for biomedical students at a research-intensive (R1) university in the midwestern United States called Writing Initiative in Neuroscience (WIN). Method: WIN consisted of didactic and workshop components. The didactic component included discussions with topic-specific experts on writing grants and manuscripts for the public and for non-academic scientific careers. The workshop component consisted of small group-based peer review of participant writing samples. Student self-enrollment consistently filled all available seats over three separate cohorts, including those formed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Student self-assessments were implemented to determine improvements quantitatively and qualitatively in writing and peer-review across 3 years of WIN programming. Results: Student self-assessment of writing skills before and after programming revealed improved scientific writing competency with medium or large effect sizes. Qualitative self-assessments indicated perceived improvements in writing competency and confidence. Collectively, students who participated in WIN improved their writing and communication skills and gained experience in providing and receiving feedback. Conclusions: Ultimately, peer-led writing initiatives, such as WIN, may enhance scholarly training and lay a foundation for future trainee writing success across scientific disciplines. Implications for Theory or Practice: These results support the utility of a student-centered writing workshop for biomedical students. Our study combined aspects of multiple existing resources, including peer feedback, interdisciplinary student backgrounds, and professional editing guidance. Together, these features formed a flexible and practical writing workshop, which can be used as a template for biomedical training programs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Higher Learning Research Communications
Higher Learning Research Communications Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信