Defining a Flexible Notion of “Good” STEM Writing Across Contexts: Lessons Learned From a Cross-Institutional Conversation
Defining a Flexible Notion of “Good” STEM Writing Across Contexts: Lessons Learned From a Cross-Institutional Conversation
复制标题
跨情境定义“好”STEM 写作的灵活概念：从跨机构对话中汲取的经验教训
DOI：
10.3389/fcomm.2022.767557
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Michael Kennedy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sara M. Grady;J. Morton;C. G. Druschke;I. Lofgren;N. Karraker;Scott R. McWilliams;Nedra Reynolds;E. Finan;Patti L. Wolter;D. Leff;Michael Kennedy
我们响应研究生科学家对科学传播培训的浓厚兴趣，倡导专注于STEM写作及其评估的专业信息方法。我们认为，STEM传播计划将受益于从产品的战略重点转向灵活的理解写作作为一种值得关注和研究的实践。要做到这一点，我们利用我们在两所大学和两个不同的程序环境中的经验，培养STEM研究生的写作和沟通。我们从跨学科的对话中确定了“好”STEM写作的四个方面：（1）连接到大局;（2）解释科学;（3）遵守体裁惯例;（4）选择上下文适当的语言。然后，我们描述了我们正在进行的对话跨上下文开发和实施灵活的规则，捕捉和促进围绕“好”的写作对话。在这样做时，我们主张将写作规则作为边界对象的概念，能够促进跨学科，综合性对话和合作，加强学生写作，将STEM学生转向对“好”写作的理解，并提供这种评估数据，为STEM管理人员和资助者提供以写作为中心的方法的力量提供有说服力的证据。
We respond to a surging interest in science communication training for graduate scientists by advocating for a focus on rhetorically informed approaches to STEM writing and its assessment. We argue that STEM communication initiatives would benefit by shifting from a strategic focus on products to a flexible understanding of writing as a practice worthy of attention and study. To do that, we use our experience across two universities and two distinct programmatic contexts to train STEM graduate students in writing and communication. We draw from cross-disciplinary conversations to identify four facets of “good” STEM writing: (1) connecting to the big picture; (2) explaining science; (3) adhering to genre conventions; and (4) choosing context-appropriate language. We then describe our ongoing conversations across contexts to develop and implement flexible rubrics that capture and foster conversations around “good” writing. In doing so, we argue for a notion of writing rubrics as boundary objects, capable of fostering cross-disciplinary, integrative conversations and collaborations that strengthen student writing, shift STEM students toward a rhetorically informed sense of “good” writing, and offer that kinds of assessment data that make for persuasive evidence of the power of writing-centric approaches for STEM administrators and funders.
为什么修辞对生态学很重要
影响因子：
10.3
作者：
Druschke, Caroline Gottschalk;McGreavy, Bridie
通讯作者：
McGreavy, Bridie
影响因子：
9
作者：
Rubega, Margaret A.;Burgio, Kevin R.;MacDonald, A. Andrew;Oeldorf-Hirsch, Anne;Capers, Robert S.;Wyss, Robert
通讯作者：
Wyss, Robert