Collaborating With Writing Centers on Interdisciplinary Peer Tutor Training to Improve Writing Support for Engineering Students

Introduction: Faculty members have little time and usually lack expertise to provide writing feedback on lab reports. Sending students to a writing center, an existing resource on virtually all college campuses, could fill that gap. However, the majority of peer writing tutors are in nontechnical majors, and little research exists on training them to provide support for engineering students. Research question: Can peer writing tutors without technical backgrounds be trained to provide effective feedback to engineering students? About the case: Previously, sending students to the writing center was ineffective. The students did not see the value, and the tutors did not feel capable of providing feedback to them. To remedy this situation, an interdisciplinary training method was developed collaboratively by an engineering professor and the writing center director. Situating the case: Researchers have suggested that effective writing center help for engineering students is possible, and the authors have designed an interdisciplinary training method that has produced positive results. Supporting literature includes the use of generalist tutors, writing in the disciplines, genre theory, and knowledge transfer. Methods/approach: This was a three-year experiential project conducted in a junior-level engineering course. The assignment, a lab report, remained the same. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from students and tutors. Results/discussion: Tutor feedback and student satisfaction significantly improved. However, a few students who were satisfied overall still expressed interest in having their reports reviewed by a tutor with a technical background. Conclusions: Interdisciplinary tutor training can improve the feedback of peer writing tutors, providing support for faculty efforts to improve student writing. The method requires minimal faculty time and capitalizes on existing resources

Creating SkillZone: a tutoring program for international students and scholars

According to the Institute of International Education, international students represent a sizeable portion of the student body within the higher education system of the United States – a total of 886, 052 international students were enrolled in either a public or private institution during the 2013-2014 academic year. However, literature related to tutoring centers built specifically for international students is lacking. As such, it is essential that this specific population be addressed within relevant research. The purpose of this article is to shed light on the current model of an academic support center for international students at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Board 317: Improving Undergraduate STEM Writing: A Collaboration Between Instructors and Writing Center Directors to Improve Peer-Writing Tutor Feedback

Undergraduate STEM writing skills, especially in engineering fields, need improvement. Yet students in engineering fields often do not value writing skills and underestimate the amount of writing they will do in their careers. University writing centers can be a helpful resource, but peer writing tutors need to be prepared for the differences between writing for the humanities and writing in STEM fields. The Writing Assignment Tutor Training in STEM (WATTS) model is designed to improve tutor confidence and student writing. In this innovative training, the writing center supervisor collaborates with the STEM instructor to create a one-hour tutor-training where the tutors learn about the assignment content, vocabulary, and expectations. This multidisciplinary collaborative project builds on previous investigative work to determine the impact of WATTS on students, tutors, and faculty and to identify its mitigating and moderating effects. Data has been collected and analyzed from pre- and post- training surveys, interviews, and focus groups. In addition, the project studies WATTS effects on student writing pre- and post-tutoring. The team will use these results to develop a replicable, sustainable model for future expansion to other institutions and fields. By systematically collecting data and testing WATTS, the investigators will be able to identify its mitigating and moderating effects on different stakeholders and contribute valuable knowledge to STEM fields. This approach assesses the elements of the model that have the most impact and the extent to which WATTS can be used to increase collaboration between engineering instructors and writing centers. The project enables the investigators to expand WATTS to additional engineering courses, test key factors with more instructors, refine the process, and position WATTS for dissemination to a broad audience. As the cost of higher education rises, institutions are pressured to graduate students in four years and engineering curricula are becoming more complex. WATTS presents an economical, effective method to improve student writing in the discipline. Several factors indicate that it has the potential for broad dissemination and impact and will provide a foundation for a sustainable model for future work, as instructors become trainers for their colleagues, allowing additional ongoing expansion and implementation. WATTS serves as a model for institutions (large or small) to capitalize on existing infrastructure and resources to achieve large-scale improvements to undergraduate STEM writing while increasing interdisciplinary collaboration and institutional support

Board 121: Using Tutor-led Support to Enhance Engineering Student Writing for All

Writing Assignment Tutor Training in STEM (WATTS) is part of a three-year NSF IUSE grant with participants at three institutions. This research project seeks to determine to what extent students in the WATTS project show greater writing improvement than students using writing tutors not trained in WATTS. The team collected baseline, control, and experimental data. Baseline data included reports written by engineering and engineering technology students with no intervention to determine if there were variations in written communication related to student demographics and institutions. Control data included reports written by students who visited tutors with no WATTS training, and experimental data included reports written by students who visited tutors who were WATTS-trained. Reports were evaluated by the research team using a slightly modified version of the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Written Communication VALUE Rubric. Baseline data assessment also provided an opportunity to test the effectiveness of the rubric. This paper presents findings from the analysis of the control and experimental data to determine the impact of WATTS on student writing in lab reports. An aggregate score for each lab report was determined by averaging the reviewer scores. An analysis was run to determine if there was a statistical difference between pre-tutoring lab report scores from the baseline, control, and experimental rubric scores for each criterion and total scores; there was not a statistically significant difference. The research team ran a Wilcoxon signed-rank test to assess the relationship between control and experimental aggregate rubric scores for each criterion. The preliminary analysis of the control and experimental data shows that the WATTS intervention has a positive, statistically significant impact on written communication skills regardless of the campus student demographics. Since WATTS has been shown to be a low-cost, effective intervention to improve engineering and engineering technology students’ written communication skills at these participating campuses, it has potential use for other institutions to positively impact their students’ written communication

Comparison of Undergraduate Student Writing in Engineering Disciplines at Campuses with Varying Demographics

Writing is generally recognized as fundamental to the formation and communication of scientific and technical knowledge to peer groups and general audiences. Often, persuasive writing is an essential attribute emphasized by industries and businesses for a successful career in STEM fields. Nevertheless, the current scenario is that students in STEM fields, with their increased demand for more specialized skills in fewer credit hours combined with a lack of emphasis on writing from engineering faculty members, make addressing this need difficult. In addition, students in engineering fields often do not value writing skills and underestimate the amount of writing they will do in their careers. Hence, it is essential to understand and quantify the level of writing skills STEM students exhibit in their technical courses so that mitigation efforts can be designed using commonly available resources to enhance this important skillset among the students, including university writing centers. A research question was posed to study this aspect of technical writing: How do STEM students at institutions conceive of writing and its role in classroom laboratories? This research was conducted at three different universities with students of varied demographics, including one which is designated as a Hispanic-serving institution, via a sequential mixed-methods design. The demography variation among the institutions includes the level of college preparation among students and the mix of ethnicity to see if there are variations among certain groups. Although the sample size is small, the goal was to establish a methodology and a preliminary outcome set that could be used in further research with larger populations. Research data in the form of reports and surveys, were collected from groups of students from four distinct campuses to ascertain the technical writing capability of each group and provide a comparison to better understand the level of intervention required. The quantitative data was collected throughout the academic year through Likert scale surveys as well as rubric-based evaluation of reports. The research design, methodology, and results of the research findings and the proposed mitigation efforts to improve student writing in STEM fields are presented in the paper

Creating Successful Campus Partnerships for Teaching Communication in Biology Courses and Labs

Creating and teaching successful writing and communication assignments for biology undergraduate students can be challenging for faculty trying to balance the teaching of technical content. The growing body of published research and scholarship on effective teaching of writing and communication in biology can help inform such work, but there are also local resources available to support writing within biology courses that may be unfamiliar to science faculty and instructors. In this article, we discuss common on-campus resources biology faculty can make use of when incorporating writing and communication into their teaching. We present the missions, histories, and potential collaboration outcomes of three major on-campus writing resources: writing across the curriculum and writing in the disciplines initiatives (WAC/WID), writing programs, and writing centers. We explain some of the common misconceptions about these resources in order to help biology faculty understand their uses and limits, and we offer guiding questions faculty might ask the directors of these resources to start productive conversations. Collaboration with these resources will likely save faculty time and effort on curriculum development and, more importantly, will help biology students develop and improve their critical reading, writing, and communication skills

Practicing what we preach: Assessing communication center client and staff perspectives of positive communication conferencing practices

Using Mirivel's (2014) Positive Communication Model as a communication center conferencing training framework, both clients and staff were surveyed to determine  to what extent positive communication behaviors were present in communication center client/staff interactions as well as to what extent center staff self-perceptions of positive communication conferencing behaviors align with client perceptions of staff behaviors. Overall, all positive communication behaviors were present in interactions and client and staff perceptions closely aligned. The findings support the use of the Positive Communication Model as a useful framework for training communication center staff on effective conferencing behaviors

Building a Successful Communication Center at a STEM Institution through Multidisciplinary Leadership, Programming, and Strategic Partnerships

Beyond the introductory public speaking course, communication centers can play a significant role in higher education through creating an institutional culture of communication that spans disciplines and through contributing to their institutional mission, strategic plan, and student success initiatives. To do this work, this article argues for the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach to communication centers, achieved through three key strategies: collaborative, multidisciplinary leadership; diverse communication center programming; and strategic partnerships. Implementing a Co-Director leadership model allows representation from multiple disciplines, resulting in a stronger communication center better able to innovate, refine, achieve goals, and respond to institutional needs. Using a three pillar center structure that incorporates multiple external perspectives and leverages outside knowledge can increase center reach, improve tutor training and tutee experience, grow faculty participation and buy-in, and raise the overall center profile. By prioritizing strategic, multidisciplinary partnerships, this article offers recommendations for new and established centers that can lead to expanded services and stronger support from campus stakeholders to meet changing institutional needs and to cement the center’s status as vital to that institution