Mixed Methods research on student experiences with writing

Overview

Mixed method research on General Education college writing classes is commonly used within the field of rhetoric and composition studies as a means to understand pedagogical strategies professors can use in teaching college-level writing and identify strategies which would lead to improvement in college writing pedagogy. The purpose of analyzing students’ attitudes to general education writing seminars is to establish a pedagogical style which is effective for students that stem from various educational backgrounds and interests. This methodology helps identify students’ current attitudes towards introductory writing classes and introduce effective teaching strategies to facilitate better learning and writing environments within the university system. Many of these articles address the growing development of S.T.E.M. (science, technology, engineering and math) subjects and the importance of scientific writing within the curriculum. It is important to use a mixed methodological approach to this examination because it allows rhetoric and composition researchers to understand student attitudes towards university writing in multiple ways. By asking both open ended response questions, but also compiling the information based on trends and patterns received from surveys into quantifiable information, the mixed method approach seems to offer a variety of information. In many cases, students have an idea about what they think should be taught within an English class (which is what they identify an introductory writing class to be classified as in certain cases.) As Heiman’s article explains (see below), students believe that literature and critical thinking should be a primary focus and do not necessarily understand why science or math would be integrated into this type of classroom. Therefore, surveys with qualitative responses are important for researchers to understand the preconceived notions the students have about writing classrooms. Additionally, researchers can use quantitative data in order to analyze the qualitative information that they have received. This allows researchers to find patterns and trends in classrooms and assess them in order to discover potential teaching strategies that would improve students’ experiences within the writing classroom.

Commonly Used Methods of Analysis

• Survey- Questioning both students and professors regarding writing classroom expectations and positive pedagogical strategies
• Interview- Interviews with students asking their feelings regarding General Education composition courses and both positive and negative previous experiences of pedagogical approaches to writing
• Comparative analysis- Examination and analysis of student writing performance by collection and comparison from college professors in order to see the potential advantages or problems of different teaching methods used within General Education writing courses. This includes a wide range of assignments such as analytical essays, empirical essays, lab reports, rhetorical analysis, critical reviews, etc.

Typical Methodological Process

Researchers in rhetoric and composition interested in studying student attitudes towards the writing classroom typically follow these steps in their research:

1. Researchers select a certain classroom(s)
2. Researchers conduct an analysis of the classroom dynamics in terms of educational background and intended majors within the university
3. Researchers survey or interview students to find out their views towards what introductory writing classes should be/are asking for
4. Researchers look at different pedagogical strategies that have been applied to prior classrooms and assess what different departments within the university are looking for in terms of student writing
5. Professors assign certain projects which incorporate multiple types of learning into the classroom as well as articles that cross over to different disciplines that may be applicable to all majors to promote critical thinking

Ideal Situations of Use

Addressing and analyzing different General Education writing classrooms that encompass students within different tracks and majors is an integral part in determining teaching strategies for professors. Studying student attitudes to General Education writing classes can allow for researchers to better understand the mindset of their students. If students seem to be resistant from the beginning of class, professors can immediately identify certain teaching strategies that may work more effectively than other in a resistant classroom. Additionally, professors can identify if General Education writing classes are more effective if they contain a group of students with diverse majors as opposed to having a General Education writing class with students of all the same major. Would the material studied in these types of classrooms change in any way to accommodate a classroom of students with all the same major? Or should it be conducted in the same way? These are just a few questions that this methodology and research could assist with. Summary of Sample Studies

One example of this mixed methods studies of student experience within General Education writing courses is James Heiman’s article “Odd Topics and Open Minds: Implementing Critical Thinking in Interdisciplinary, Thematic Writing Courses.” Heiman advocates for the “understanding of science and technology- and the ability to communicate knowledge in those areas effectively and persuasively” (107). Heiman examines the role “of critical thinking in thematic writing courses, particularly in interdisciplinary ones” (108). He started his General Education writing course, in which he focused on science and technology, by administering a survey to his students asking a bank of questions regarding “their experience and expectations for a General Education writing course” (110). While some of his questions in his survey seem to be leading, his goal is to understand the preconceived attitudes of his students. Heiman does compile the results of his survey into quantifiable numbers, which suggests that his is using a mixed methods approach to integrate lengthy responses to questions into a quantifiable solution. Heiman also explains the different modes (and potential problems) of explanations of critical thinking. He offers a variety of activities, though not necessarily specific, to engage students in critical thinking while using scientific and technical writing within the classroom. Heiman defends his argument of introducing the sciences into an English field by explaining that English studies/majors are “dedicated to the analysis and the discussion of texts” (123). It is through this example that he is able to explain both the importance of the dissection of text for those whose majors fit into the non-scientific category, but also the importance of scientific and technical writing in our changing society.

Carolyn Haynes begins her article “Interdisciplinary Writing and the Undergraduate Experience” by explaining her position as a writing professor who is teaching an interdisciplinary writing class. She uses various teaching strategies in order to demonstrate how students can communicate effectively within their writing amongst multiple majors. She understands that “WAC goals do not necessarily prepare students to enter into the written interchanges of their chosen disciplines” (29). By examining this issue within General Education writing courses she understands that “within any given classroom setting students may be engaging in different ways of knowing; thus it is important that assignments be flexible enough to challenge and appeal to a range of learners” (31). She suggests various ways in which students can engage in the given material that is presented within a General Education writing class and uses these strategies as a means to incorporate multiple disciplines within her classroom. She uses Baxter Magolda’s interviews and examples as a research tool in which to implement these procedures into her classroom. Haynes follows Magnolda’s conducted interviews with college students over their four years of study to determine their stages of knowing and presents a comprehensive look at the different student objectives, professor objectives, and possible assignments that can be assigned in order to achieve success within an interdisciplinary classroom. Haynes then takes this information and uses it as a tool to examine student writing by scoring entire portfolios into a quantifiable number but also has students write self- reflective essays in order to establish their state of mind and the methods behind their writing process. Haynes helps answer the specifying question as to how to implement effective writing strategies into a classroom in which there are many diverse interests and desired outcomes.

For additional information and literature review, see also: Comeau, Paula. “Science in the Writing Classroom: Interdisciplinary Rhetorical Explorations”

References

This article "Mixed Methods research on student experiences with writing" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Mixed Methods research on student experiences with writing. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.

---