Argument-Driven Inquiry: Using the Laboratory To Improve Undergraduates’ Science Writing Skills through Meaningful Science Writing, Peer-Review, and Revision

Abstract

This paper presents preliminary evidence supporting the use of peer review in undergraduate science as a means to improve student writing and to alleviate barriers, such as lost class time, by incorporation of the peer-review process into the laboratory component of the course. The study was conducted in a single section of an undergraduate general chemistry laboratory course offered at a large two-year community college located in the southeastern United States. The chemistry laboratory course was taught using Argument-Driven Inquiry, an instructional model that incorporates double-blind group peer review of student laboratory reports, and allows students to revise their reports based on the peer reviews. The reports written for each laboratory activity were used to examine changes in the students’ writing skills over time and to identify aspects of science writing that were the most difficult for the undergraduates in this context. The reviews generated by the students were used to evaluate student engagement in the peer-review process. The results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the reports and reviews indicate that the participants made significant improvements in the their ability to write in science and were able to evaluate the quality of their peers’ writing with a relatively high degree of accuracy, but also struggled with several aspects of science writing.

Effective Laboratory Work in Biochemistry Subject: Students’ and Lecturers’ Perspective in Indonesia

“…The writing experiments report could be used to measure the students' critical thinking ability (Hoyo, 2003;Contakes, 2016). In addition, through the report writing, students could build arguments that were positively correlated to the oral communication ability (Walker & Sampson, 2013). Duzor (2016) reported that report writing could connect the theories and practices in the laboratory.…”

Meaningful Biochemistry Learning Using the Orientation-Decision-Do-Discuss-Reflect (OD3R) Method

“…Moreover, in this stage, basic theory can be strengthened and, hence, allows students to think through their inquiry design. Benefits of drafting an inquiry are that the students can build arguments, improve motivation, and it also produces meaningful learning not only for students but also for teachers (Walker & Sampson, 2013;Miller & Lang;Jean Burnham, 2013).…”

“…Writing reports has more advantages than answering questions at exams. In addition to constructing arguments, composing inquiry reports can hone critical thinking skills (Contakes, 2016;Walker & Sampson, 2013;Quitadamo & Kurtz, 2007). The ability to discuss inquiry in reports can relate theories studied in the classroom to laboratory investigation results (Duzor, 2016).…”

“…To that end, students are given opportunity to design and develop their investigations in an integrated laboratory, as well as training practical skills, improving critical thinking and both verbal and written communication (Limoto & Frederick, 2011;Tsaparlis & Gorezi, 2007;Quitadamo & Kurtz, 2007;Walker & Sampson, 2013;Bruck & Towns, 2010). Thus, the learning is not only beneficial for students but also for lecturers (Jean Burnham, 2013).…”

Using HeLa cell stress response to introduce first year students to the scientific method, laboratory techniques, primary literature, and scientific writing

“…It has previously been noted that the benefits of instructor editing are not as strong as that of peer editing . Therefore, I propose that future use of this module incorporate a system of peer‐review as used in other similar research and writing paired assignments . Specifically, the third module session, even with the inclusion of a worksheet activity would have provided some down time for peer editing of introductions and methods to take place.…”