Date of Original Version
We respond to a surging interest in science communication training for graduate scientists by advocating for a focus on rhetorically informed approaches to STEM writing and its assessment. We argue that STEM communication initiatives would benefit by shifting from a strategic focus on products to a flexible understanding of writing as a practice worthy of attention and study. To do that, we use our experience across two universities and two distinct programmatic contexts to train STEM graduate students in writing and communication. We draw from cross-disciplinary conversations to identify four facets of “good” STEM writing: (1) connecting to the big picture; (2) explaining science; (3) adhering to genre conventions; and (4) choosing context-appropriate language. We then describe our ongoing conversations across contexts to develop and implement flexible rubrics that capture and foster conversations around “good” writing. In doing so, we argue for a notion of writing rubrics as boundary objects, capable of fostering cross-disciplinary, integrative conversations and collaborations that strengthen student writing, shift STEM students toward a rhetorically informed sense of “good” writing, and offer that kinds of assessment data that make for persuasive evidence of the power of writing-centric approaches for STEM administrators and funders.
Publication Title, e.g., Journal
Frontiers in Communication
Grady SM, Morton-Aiken J, Druschke CG, Lofgren IE, Karraker NE, McWilliams SR, Reynolds N, Finan E, Wolter PL, Leff DR and Kennedy M (2022) Defining a Flexible Notion of “Good” STEM Writing Across Contexts: Lessons Learned From a Cross-Institutional Conversation. Front. Commun. 7:767557. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2022.767557
Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.767557
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.