First-year undergraduate science students experienced a writing program as an important part of their assessment in a biology subject. The writing program was designed to help them develop both their scientific understanding as well as their written scientific expression. Open-ended questionnaires investigating the quality of the experience of learning through writing were distributed to 165 students. Interviews with six tutors on the writing program were also completed. Key results included that if students were not aware of the potential of learning science through writing, they tended to focus on superficial aspects of the writing experience, such as grammar, rather than the scientific knowledge that underpinned the experience. The results have important implications for the integration of writing experiences into university subjects and tutor approaches to writing tuition.
BiggsJ.B. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
2.
CopeC. (2000). Educationally critical aspects of the experience of learning about the concept of an information system. Unpublished PhD thesis, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
3.
CrawfordK.GordonS.NicholasJ.ProsserM. (1994). Conceptions of mathematics and how it is learned: The perspectives of students entering university. Learning and Instruction, 4, 331–45.
4.
DavydovV.V.MarkovaA.K. (1983). A concept of educational activity for schoolchildren. Soviet Psychology, 21, 50–76.
5.
DruryH.TaylorC.E. (1996). The integration of content and communication skills: Changing teaching philosophy in first year science. In PoseR.JawaryA. (Eds.), Australian Communication Conference 1996: Teaching communication skills in a technological era, (2, pp. 137–45),Clayton: Monash University.
6.
EllisR.A. (2003). Understanding the nature and implications of writing to learn experiences. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sydney, NSW.
7.
EllisR.A. (2004). Student approaches to learning science through writing. International Journal of Science Education, 26(15), 1835–54.
8.
HazelE.ProsserM.TrigwellK. (2002). Variation in learning orchestration in university biology courses. International Journal of Science Education, 24(7), 737–51.
9.
HounsellD. (1984). Essay planning and essay writing. Higher Education and Research, 3(1), 13–31.
10.
HounsellD. (1987). Essay writing and the quality of feedback. In RichardsonJ.EysenckM.PiperW. (Eds.). Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology (pp. 109–19). Milton Keynes: Society for Research Into Higher Education and Open University Press.
11.
HounsellD. (1997). Contrasting conceptions of essay writing. In MartonF.HounsellD.EntwistleN.J. (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education (2nd ed., pp. 106–25). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
12.
LeaM.R. (2001). Computer conferencing and assessment: New ways of writing in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 163–81.
13.
LeaM.R.StreetB.V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–72.
14.
Leont'evA. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In WertschJ.V. (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37–71). New York: M. E. Sharpe.
15.
MartinJ.R. (1999). Mentoring semogenesis: ‘Genre-based’ literacy pedagogy. In ChristieF.MartinJ.R. (Eds.), Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness: Linguistic and social processes (Open Linguistics Series, editor R. Fawcett), (pp. 123–55). London: Cassell.
16.
MartonF. (1988). Describing and improving learning. In SchmeckR. (Ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 53–82). New York: Plenum.
17.
MartonF.BoothS. (1997). Learning and awareness. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
MooreR. (1993). Does writing about science improve learning about science?Journal of College Science Teaching, 23(2), 212–17.
19.
PearsonJ. (1999, June 13–18). Lurking, anonymity and participation in computer conferencing. Paper presented at the Open Conference on Communications and Networking in Education, Aulanko, Finland. Abstract retrieved November 25, 2005. http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de
20.
ProsserM. (1993). Phenomenography and the principles and practices of learning. Higher Education Research and Development, 12(1), 21–31.
21.
ProsserM.WebbC. (1994). Relating the process of undergraduate essay writing to the finished product. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), 125–38.
22.
TaylorC.E. (2002, July). Communicating to learn to write: Unravelling the learning processes in online discussions on scientific report writing. Poster session at Writing02: 8th International Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction. Stafford, UK.
23.
TaylorC.E.DruryH. (1996). Teaching writing skills in the science curriculum. Research and Development in Higher Education, 19, 160–4.
24.
TaylorC.E.DruryH. (2004). The effect of student prior experience, attitudes and expectations on performance in an undergraduate science writing. In RijlaarsdamG.van der BeergH.CousijnsM. (Eds.), Effective teaching and learning of writing: A handbook of writing in education (Studies in Writing Series, editor G. Rijlaarsdam), (pp. 435–51). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
25.
TrigwellK.ProsserM. (1997). Towards an understanding of individual sets of teaching and learning. Higher Education and Development, 16(2), 241–51.
26.
VygotskyL.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
27.
VygotskyL.S. (1986). Thought and language (rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28.
WildM. (1999). The anatomy of practice in the use of mailing lists: A case study. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 117–35. Retrieved November 24, 2005 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet15/ajet15.html
