How faculty discipline and beliefs influence instructional uses of writing in STEM undergraduate courses at research-intensive universities

R. Thompson, S. Finkenstaedt-Quinn, G. Shultz, A. Gere, J. A. Reynolds
{"title":"How faculty discipline and beliefs influence instructional uses of writing in STEM undergraduate courses at research-intensive universities","authors":"R. Thompson, S. Finkenstaedt-Quinn, G. Shultz, A. Gere, J. A. Reynolds","doi":"10.17239/JOWR-2021.12.03.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Efforts to accelerate the pace of adoption of writing-to-learn (WTL) practices in undergraduate STEM courses have been limited by a lack of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to systematically guide research and empirical evidence about the extent to which intrapersonal attributes and contextual factors, particularly faculty beliefs and disciplinary cultures, influence faculty use of writing assignments in their teaching. To address these gaps, we adopted an ecological systems perspective and conducted a national survey of faculty in STEM departments across 63 research-intensive universities in the United States. Overall, the findings indicated that 70% of faculty assigned writing. However, the assignment of writing differed by faculty demographics, discipline, and beliefs. More specifically, faculty demographics accounted for 5% of the variance in assignment of writing. Faculty discipline accounted for an additional 6% increment in variance, and faculty epistemic beliefs and beliefs about effectiveness of WTL practices and contextual resources and constraints influencing the use of writing in their teaching together accounted for an additional 30% increment in variance. The findings point to faculty beliefs as salient intervention targets and highlight the importance of disciplinary specific approaches to the promotion of the adoption of WTL practices.","PeriodicalId":30549,"journal":{"name":"Libellarium Journal for the Research of Writing Books and Cultural Heritage Institutions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Libellarium Journal for the Research of Writing Books and Cultural Heritage Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17239/JOWR-2021.12.03.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Efforts to accelerate the pace of adoption of writing-to-learn (WTL) practices in undergraduate STEM courses have been limited by a lack of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to systematically guide research and empirical evidence about the extent to which intrapersonal attributes and contextual factors, particularly faculty beliefs and disciplinary cultures, influence faculty use of writing assignments in their teaching. To address these gaps, we adopted an ecological systems perspective and conducted a national survey of faculty in STEM departments across 63 research-intensive universities in the United States. Overall, the findings indicated that 70% of faculty assigned writing. However, the assignment of writing differed by faculty demographics, discipline, and beliefs. More specifically, faculty demographics accounted for 5% of the variance in assignment of writing. Faculty discipline accounted for an additional 6% increment in variance, and faculty epistemic beliefs and beliefs about effectiveness of WTL practices and contextual resources and constraints influencing the use of writing in their teaching together accounted for an additional 30% increment in variance. The findings point to faculty beliefs as salient intervention targets and highlight the importance of disciplinary specific approaches to the promotion of the adoption of WTL practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在研究型大学的STEM本科课程中,教师的纪律和信仰如何影响写作的教学用途
由于缺乏理论和概念框架来系统地指导有关个人属性和背景因素(特别是教师信仰和学科文化)在多大程度上影响教师在教学中使用写作作业的研究和经验证据,加快在本科STEM课程中采用写作学习(WTL)实践的步伐的努力受到了限制。为了解决这些差距,我们采用了生态系统的观点,并对美国63所研究型大学的STEM部门的教师进行了全国调查。总体而言,调查结果表明70%的教师布置了写作。然而,写作任务因教师人口统计、学科和信仰而异。更具体地说,教师人口统计数据占写作任务差异的5%。教师纪律在方差中占6%的额外增量,教师的认知信念和对WTL实践有效性的信念以及影响教学中写作使用的上下文资源和约束的信念在方差中占30%的额外增量。研究结果指出,教师信念是显著的干预目标,并强调了学科特定方法对促进采用WTL实践的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Digitisation of films and selection of films for digitisation from the perspective of users Metodologija strukture izrade životopisa te kriterija odabira osoba za upis u mrežni biografski leksikon How public libraries deliver value online Tržište elektroničkih knjiga u Republici Hrvatskoj - pregled snaga, slabosti, prilika i prijetnji s naznakama budućeg razvoja Public Libraries as Agonistic Spaces: At the Crossroads of Librarianship and Contemporary Artistic Practices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1