Chapter 4. Writing and becoming a scientist
A longitudinal qualitative study of three science undergraduates
In many communication-intensive (CI) classes in the sciences, students are learning the essential practices for knowledge production in tandem with professional communication practices. In short, they are learning to communicate as a biologist or chemist or physicist. To explore this process more closely, we conducted a three-year qualitative study of 17 undergraduate and graduate students in science and engineering CI classes at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology via initial and end-of-year surveys, one-to-one interviews, classroom observation, and collection and analysis of student writing. In this chapter, we present the findings about three students who were sophomores at the beginning of the study and graduating seniors at its conclusion to understand if these students evidenced changes in their understanding of the roles and purposes of communicating science. Based on coded interview data and analysis of student writing, the case studies we report in this chapter offer insights into the intertwined relationship between students’ developing scientific knowledge and their shifting identities as students/scientists/engineers/writers. Understanding students’ perspectives on entering professional communities through their communicative practices, particularly given the constraints of school contexts, speaks to the need to design instruction that responds to students’ developmental levels and their readiness to learn to communicate in science and engineering.
References (29)
Artemeva, N
(
2005)
A time to speak, a time to act: A rhetorical genre analysis of a novice engineer’s calculated risk taking.
Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19(4), 389–421.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Artemeva, N
(
2009)
Stories of becoming: A study of novice engineers learning genres of their profession. In
C. Bazerman,
A. Bonini, &
D. Figueiredo (Eds.),
Genre in a changing world: Perspectives on writing (pp. 158–178). Fort Collins, CO: WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Beaufort, A
(
2007)
College writing and beyond: A new framework for university writing instruction. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blakeslee, A
(
2001)
Interacting with audiences: Social influences on the production of scientific writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, B.A., Reveles, J.M., & Kelly, G.J
(
2005)
Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning.
Science Education, 89, 779–802.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carroll, L.A
(
2002)
Rehearsing new roles: How college students develop as writers. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Connolly, P
(
1989)
Writing and the ecology of learning. In
P. Connolly &
T. Vilardi (Eds.),
Writing to learn mathematics and science (pp. 1–12). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Curry, M.J
(
2012)
Transcending ‘traditional academic boundaries’: Designing and implementing a science communication course for science and engineering Ph.D. students.
Professional and Academic Writing, 40, 4–7.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dannels, D.P
(
2000)
Learning to be professional: Technical classroom discourse, practice, and professional identity construction.
Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 14(1), 5–32.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ding, H
(
2008)
The use of co grant writing.
Written Communication, 25(1), 3–52.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ellis, R.A
(
2004)
University student approaches to learning science through writing.
International Journal of Science Education, 26(15), 1835–1853.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Freedman, A., & Adam, C
(
2000)
Write where you are: Situating learning to write in university and workplace settings. In
P. Dias &
A. Paré (Eds.),
Transitions: Writing in academic and workplace settings (pp. 31–60). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haas, C
(
1994)
Learning to read biology: One student’s rhetorical development in college.
Written Communication, 11, 43–84.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hanauer, D.I., Jacobs-Sera, D., Pedulla, M.L., Cresawn, S.G., Hendrix, R.W., & Hatfull G. F
(
2006)
Inquiry learning: Teaching scientific inquiry.
Science, 314(5807), 1880–1.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haswell, R.H
(
1991)
Gaining grounding ground in college writing: Tales of development and interpretation. Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Herrington, A. & Curtis, M
(
2000)
Persons in process: Four stories of writing and personal development in college. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hodson, D
(
1998)
Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science and beyond the school laboratory. In
J. Wellington (Ed.),
Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 93–108). London: Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lave, J., & Wenger, E
(
1991)
Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lett, J
(
1990)
Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of anthropology. In
T.N. Headland,
K.L. Pike, &
M. Harris (Eds.),
Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate. Frontiers of Anthropology, 7 (pp. 127–142). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Leydens, J.A
(
2008)
Novice and insider perspectives on academic workplace writing: Toward a continuum of rhetorical awareness.
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51(3), 242–263.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindlof, T.R., & Taylor, B.C
(
2011).
Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mishler, E.G
(
1990)
Validation in inquiry-guided research: The role of exemplars in narrative studies.
Harvard Educational Review, 60, 415–442.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Odell, L., Goswami, D., & Herrington, A
(
1983)
The discourse-based interview: A procedure for exploring the tacit knowledge of writers in nonacademic settings. In
P. Mosenthal,
L. Tamor &
S. Walmsley (Eds.),
Writing research: Methods and procedures (pp. 221–236). London: Longman.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Patton, M
(
2011)
Writing in the research university: A Darwinian study of WID with cases from civil engineering. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Poe, M., Lerner, N., & Craig, J
(
2010)
Learning to communicate in science and engineering: Case studies from MIT. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Russell, D
(
2001)
Where do the naturalistic studies of WAC/WID point? A research review. In
S. McLeod,
E. Miraglia,
M. Soven, &
C. Thaiss (Eds.),
WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing across the curriculum programs (pp. 259–298). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sommers, N., & Saltz, L
(
2004)
The novice as expert.
College Composition and Communication, 56(1), 124–149.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thaiss, C., & Porter, T
(
2010)
The state of WAC/WID in 2010: Methods and results of the U.S. Survey of the International WAC/WID Mapping Project.
College Composition and Communication, 61(3), 534–570.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yin, R.K
(
2008)
Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (2)
Cited by 2 other publications
Falout, Joseph, Matthew Apple & Glen Hill
2022.
Setting the Stage of STEM English for Students. In
STEM English in Japan,
► pp. 3 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Paretti, Marie C., Andreas Eriksson & Magnus Gustafsson
2019.
Faculty and Student Perceptions of the Impacts of Communication in the Disciplines (CID) on Students’ Development as Engineers.
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 62:1
► pp. 27 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.