The challenge of teaching academic writing online: developing report writing programs for science and

engineering Helen Drury, Learning Centre, The University of Sydney

• Why teach writing online?

• Program design

– Theory

– Practice

• Evaluation

• Issues

• Future directions

• Discussion

Outline

Why teach writing online

• Key features: flexibility, self-paced instruction, multiple learner pathways

• New ways of learning about text, graphic/text interaction, new ways of writing

But there are constraints ….

Program design : theory• Draw on tried & tested approaches for redesigning• ‘design takes the results of past production as the

resource for new shaping and for remaking’ (Kress, 1997)• SFL • Multimodal research• Genre-based literacy pedagogy (Martin, 1999)

• Model of language in context• Make explicit to students writing practices of their disciplines• Build a metalanguage to use in interactions with students and

subject staff about language and how it means in a given context

Program design : theory phenomenography

• Focus on learners’ conceptions of subject matter

• Learning through interaction with on-screen teacher designs/concepts

• On-going ‘conversation’ between teacher and student concepts to achieve shared learning goal (Laurrilard, 2002)

• Learning takes place through language

Practice: History of WRiSE

1999 2003 2006 2007 2009

Biology

Authorware

Report writing

Internal

Biochemistry Chemical

Engineering

Dreamweaver

Report writing

Internal

Biochemistry 2

Dreamweaver

Report writing

Internal

Physiology

Flash

Report writing Discipline content

Internal

Science and engineering

Flash

Report writing Discipline content

External

SFL and WRiSE

Martin, 2002

good to hear from people we knew, more real

it had a sample introduction and then it highlighted each component of each part of the introduction that you needed, which was really good.

for Chemistry, everything has to be so accurate, whereas with Chemical Engineering, you get marked down if you put too many significant figures

it’s very important to show how your work refers to the rest of the field

I find it ideal the way language is closely integrated into the material about the report structure. The other day I had a normally unruly class of 2nd year Chem Eng students enthralled in a cohesion exercise from the WRiSE site.

need to be concise and use technical jargon, follow structure, proper tense, how to refer to figures, tables.

Seeing those different colours is what helped me the most and, yep, I did change it. I wrote mine and then went to this site and looked at it and then went back and changed it.

Genre-based literacy pedagogy

Martin, J. (1999) Mentoring semogenesis: ‘genre-based’ literacy pedagogy

Setting Context

Setting Context

Deconstruction

GenreText

Building Field

Towards controlof genre

Critical Orientationto genre

How WRiSE deconstructs

Building field •Help with report writing : entry quiz•Audio from students and staff on the context of the report and both the product and process •Help with understanding content•Blended learning

Modelling •Authentic student reports with lecturer feedback•Example reports with student and lecturer comments•Generic structure exemplified•Discourse and language features exemplified•Metalanguage introduced and exemplified

some of those quizzes at the start I found a bit annoying

conscious to only put relevant info in the report

gave good example to compare my work with

Having lectures on writing other than needing to access website as is not direct, can ask qs,maybe practise or more examples

the lecturer explanations, easiest and most clear

Example and comments made on example, breakdown of report sections

Helped with how to use language and details of data

How WRiSE constructs

Joint construction (with computer)

•Scaffolding through interactive exercises•Feedback on exercises

Independent construction

•Students write alongside WRiSE•Feedback on drafts from lecturers in eportfolio

I think it helped a lot for me, writing in my second language, learned a lot from the exercises

I went over it all, by then I had an idea and then I started writing

How was the site usedSemester, 2009

Total Pageviews 57303

Average Pageviews Per Day 585

Average Pageviews Per Session 7

Average Length of Session (mins) 11

Total Unique Visitors 964

Average Unique Visitors Per Day 12

Total Unique Visitor Sessions 8275

Average Unique Visitor Sessions Per Day 100

Weekly usage

Sessions per week (all disciplines)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

08/03 15/03 22/03 29/03 05/04 12/04 19/04 26/04 03/05 10/05 17/05 24/05 31/05 07/06

Week ending

Sessions

Questionnaire Data n=417 F=173 M=190

1: Didn’t know about it 5: Forgot2: Didn’t need it 6: Used other source3: No time 7: Lazy4: No internet/problems with internet 8: No comment

42% of students surveyed did not use the site

Language background users v. non-users

Writing experienceusers v. non-users

• equally confident in their writing tasks• no difference in the types of academic texts previously produced• in general, more participants who used WRiSE had written longer academic texts than those who did not

Using WRiSE

Improved understanding

I used it on the structure, mainly what to put where, I tend to blur my results in discussion a little bit. After I wrote it I went back and looked at it and kind of pasted a few things of what I wrote. I used the seven Is, I read through those so I included a bit more with that.

Before using it I was lost as to where I should start.

...allowed me to further understand the specific requirements ...

Improved confidence

If you were really organised and you set aside two weeks just for the report, like every night, this site would be perfect for it. It’s not a really good site for cramming.

I feel more comfortable at following structure

I can explain myself clearly and am able to identify mistakes and correct..

• ...almost all students did well on the structure of the report. All was good there and many did a reasonable attempt at the Summary and Conclusion sections. So perhaps WRiSE did succeed.

• ..strongly encouraged to use the site. Quite an improvement

• I feel we definitely have a well-designed, pedagogically sound website. Informal feedback from PhD demonstrators who mark the reports indicate meaningful improvements in student report writing skills

Staff Comments

Does WRiSE make a difference?

On average, report marks of those who used the website (M = .13, SD = .97, n = 204) were significantly higher than those who did not use the website (M = -.19, SD = .98, n = 144); t(306) = -3.02, p = .01.

• Constraints of the screen– Using authentic texts– Using large/whole texts

• Constraints of an online learning environment – Writing tasks and exercises– Scaffolding student understanding– Getting lost

• Blended learning– Implementation and integration– Motivation for students to use the site

• Division between language and content• Critical/challenging orientation to the genre

Issues

Once you were inside a module, there was actually a tiny little menu right down the bottom, it would be nicer if you could navigate more easily

Towards a community of practiceTraining and experience with Question tools are very helpful indeed, a deeper consideration of student report writing is also valuable

New working relationships and collaborative links with colleagues across the University - thankyou for the opportunity to be involved in this exciting project

Future directions

Learning Centre• Janet Jones, Helen Drury, Peter

O’Carroll

Discipline Teams• Peter McGee, • Vanessa Gysbers, Dale Hancock Jill

Johnston• Tim Langrish, Howard See • Meloni Muir• Peter Rutledge • David Airey

Technical Team• Aida Yalcin, Kathy Kuzmanov,

Richard Massey

Research Assistant• Natassia Goode

Acknowledgements

Learning Centre• Sue Starfield, Pam Mort

Discipline Teams• Paul Hagan, • John Wilson, Kathy Takayama,

Rosanne Quinnell, Rebecca LeBard

Reference Group• Peter Goodyear • Robert Ellis• Michelle Kofod• Rosemary Clerehan

www.usyd.edu.au/learningcentre/wrise

Discussion Questions1. Where and how are collaborations working best

between writing specialists and teaching academics in the disciplines given students with varying levels of competency?

2. What are the implications of the above for a language based approach to teaching and learning at tertiary level in both formal and informal settings?

3. How do we do a language based approach with large cohorts?