Preparing For Future Science Research Presentations
“How can first year composition (FYC) science students learn to effectively present their research to a general audience?” We are hoping to find the answer to this question and investigate why FYC science students often have difficulty when conveying information to individuals in non-science fields. Through our experiences as science majors, we have identified a central aspect of this problem: students often lack the ability to compose cohesive research because they have not properly developed writing and rhetorical skills throughout their years of schooling. This problem affects students’ ability to state the main points of their research in a chronological, cohesive manner, which in turn affects how the presenter persuades his or her audience. In addition to this finding, we came across unexpected results when questioning the effect of students’ personal lives on their writing.
We consulted published research to examine the problems students face when applying their reading, writing, and rhetorical skills to scientific writing and writing in general. Based on our findings, we have concluded that successful FYC science students need to shift their priorities to utilizing reading and writing more often in their daily lives. This will make it easier for students to adapt their message to different types of audiences. Assuming a FYC science student has adequate reading and writing skills, their ability to get technical scientific research messages across to a general audience depends on their ability to relay the main points of their research.
James Gee, author of Reading as a Situated Language: Sociocognitive Perspective claims that a “broad perspective on reading” is important to consider, and asserts that separating the concept of reading and writing from interacting and language is false (Gee 714).
Gee focused his study on a specific interaction between a father and his toddler. He demonstrated that when the father attempts to get the child to read, the child performs his version of “reading,” because he understands the intent of the father. This is the “discourse” the child understood. “Discourses are ways of combining and coordinating words, deeds, thoughts, values, bodies, objects, tools and technologies, and other people (at the appropriate times and places) so as to enact and recognize specific socially situated identities and activities” (Gee 721). These interactions experienced throughout a lifetime translate to the development of social perspectives through language and improved reading and writing abilities. According to Gee, language is not just one entity because “...meanings of words phrases and sentences are always situated, that is, customized to our actual contexts” (Gee 717). Gee also asserts that these languages always involve discourse, allowing people to “learn a new social language or genre only to consume (interpret) but not reproduce it.” A general audience will interpret scientific research as they think the researcher intended.
As science majors we have noticed how science students can have a difficult time trying to discuss certain topics with other science students or non-science students. Gee’s points help us consider that everyone has a different “discourse” they use to comprehend information, and this is important to consider when trying to compose a scientific research paper. Mary Beth Monahan, author of Writing “Voiced” Arguments About Science Topics has explored how students can effectively “voice” their arguments to have a cohesive, understandable paper. In support of Gee’s definition of discourse, she found that papers were better written when students use their voice to appeal to certain audiences. “I-ness” seemed to be the limiting factor when students write scientific papers (Monahan 35). These limitations are apparent when students lack the ability to adequately voice their texts, support their claims, and/or write a cohesive paper. Monahan argued that when students are not free to come up with original ideas, they cannot find their voice. She states that reforming the way students are taught can help with “finding that balance of general and discipline specific literacy approaches that suits the developmental and instructional needs of students as well as the content demands of a given course of study” (Monahan 38).
So far, we have analyzed that basic writing skills are necessary to write any discipline-specific paper. The rigidity of our school system impedes the confidence of FYC science students (and FYC students in general) and prevents them from finding their voice. Students’ individual needs need to be considered more when implementing a curriculum. Samira Kakh, Wan Fara Adlina Wan Mansor, and Mohamad Hassan Zakaria, authors of Rhetorical Analysis Tasks to Develop Audience Awareness in Thesis Writing analyze how experienced postgraduate students write cohesive papers that are understandable. The techniques mentioned by Gee and Monahan are lacking in poorly written thesis papers, whereas cogent papers were much better in organization and rhetorical strategy. Some students had trouble connecting one idea to the next, in a way the audience could follow (Kakh et al 810). In well written thesis papers, rhetorical skills were utilized, while poorly written papers lacked “clear focus” (Kakh et al 810).
Sarah Holstein, Katherine R. Mickley Steinmetz, and John Miles, authors of the article Teaching Science Writing in an Introductory Lab Course, conducted a study in an attempt to improve students’ scientific writing. Just like in any writing, and similar to the ideas of Monahn and Gee, scientific processing skills are developed by reading, specifically scientific articles (Holstein et al A101). These scientific skills are needed to “effectively communicate their research” (Holstein et al A101). In addition, similar to Gee’s concept of “discourse”, Holstein et al argue that “genre” knowledge of students helps their writing, if they can properly utilize rhetorical skills (Holstein et al A103). “[G]eneral writing skills are an important part of many of the courses that will be taken in college...new or difficult content (and genres) often experience slippage in grammar and mechanics” (Holstein et al A108). This study shows how FYC science students need to learn to properly organize and voice their research according to their intended audience.
We don’t use the same language for everyone that we talk to. For example, an electrical engineer might not understand the anatomy and physiology language of a nurse. The nurse needs to be able to translate anatomy and physiology language to everyday terms. Similarly FYC science students need to consider how they present their research to a particular audience.
We felt it important to note author Christopher Aruffo and his research Turning Scientific Presentations Into Stories. He argues that the “reorientation toward being understood rather than performing well, can reduce anxiety” when presenting scientific research (Aruffo 32). Aruffo conducted a workshop where students practiced telling each other stories. It tested the students’ ability to organize information in a manner their audience could write down, and it tested the students’ ability to recall the organization of the main points (Aruffo 35). If the student presents his or her research in the format of a storyline, the pressure of presenting to an audience can be greatly reduced (Aruffo 34). FYC science students need to remember that they need to enjoy the research they choose. That way when presenting to a general audience, the voice and organization of the research will keep the audience following as the student tells their “story.”
Thus far we have analyzed tips on how to help FYC science and non-science students effectively present their research. However, we have noted that none of this data questions how or if students perceived utilizing english and rhetorical skills as important, based on at home interactions. Each article set out to study students in an academic atmosphere, but we wanted to know how these students spend their time at home. Since FYC science students are not limited to academic experiences only, we feel it is important to consider how their everyday social experiences shape their writing and rhetorical abilities. Gee’s study led us to question the aspect of connecting reading, writing, and everyday interactions to language as a learned discourse.
To answer our question, we conducted an interview with Esteban Cantu, a Professor of Chemistry and distinguished researcher from Texas A&M University Kingsville. Cantu is a university renown chemistry researcher that has given numerous presentations to all types of audiences. Esteban Cantu gladly agreed to help us gain insight on how FYC science students can learn to effectively present their research. When Stevie recalled some of his first guest lectures at A&M, he said he felt extremely nervous and had way too many notes with him to follow. As he gained experience he noted that he would make an outline of main points to make it easier for he and his audience to follow his “story”. He also noted that as long as the research is “your own”, a student should not have trouble with conveying information. The following questions we asked are shown below along with Cantu’s responses:
In addition to Cantu’s responses, we took notes on his statements during our conversation, since he preferred a more conversational-style interview. Cantu is concerned about what he has seen during his years of teaching college students. He fears apathy towards school and learning will prevent students from gaining the necessary skills to write and present effectively. A scientist’s ability to compose a coherent paper that has flowing ideas using rhetoric will determine the formulation of his or her claims or opinions. Utilizing rhetorical skills is essential when transcribing scientific literature for general audiences. It is especially important for a scientist to have adequate processing and cognitive skills, which are developed through reading and writing. Students may have trouble getting the main point of their research across; their research has a main point and they just need to stick to their chronological steps to keep the audience following. They should simply give an account of what they did and discovered. However, after discussing the basic necessities of scientific writing, Cantu mentioned that there are other considerations. Like Gee, Cantu states that language exposure throughout a student’s life shapes that student’s “discourse” about learning. Early childhood reading is important because it develops the child’s ability to read, process, and decide for his or herself. Instead of focusing on each child’s development, schools create an atmosphere in which each subject is taught separately with no interconnections between subjects and their relation to real life. This impedes a prospective science student’s (or any student’s) full potential when finding a “voice” in any research they are working on.
Cantu’s last two points challenge conventional notions that reading and writing are solely for academic, in-school purposes. It is important to expose children early to reading and writing in a non-academic setting because it will expand the child’s “discourse” that will later be used in their every-day interactions. Upon entering school, the child will be ready to analyze readings and decide for his or herself what is trying to be said. These critical thinking skills are crucial to any scientist when conducting research. In essence, Cantu agreed that research needs to be well written using rhetorical skills that are gained through the learning process in school.
Below is an image of some of the notes we took during the interview/conversation about the problems in today’s students and some advice to take in consideration.
Below is a picture of Esteban Cantu, which demonstrates how he clearly enjoys his career as a scientist, researcher and presenter. His love for his work is the reason why he can always present his research to his audience effectively.
In conclusion, we feel it is imperative that all FYC students (and not just science students) need to practice reading, writing, and communication/conversation more often so they can excel in future research, writing, and presentations. The more students practice reading and writing, the more their rhetorical skills will develop, and the easier it will be for them to interpret information and write well-organized papers.
Another important note to remember is that research should be a part of everyone's daily lives, not simply restricted to academic papers! Anyone who wants to learn something new has to read, write, or converse, all of which are different forms of research. By implementing these strategies, FYC science and general students can effectively present their future presentations.
Bibliography
Gee, James. "Reading as Situated Language: A Sociocognitive Perspective." Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading (2013): 136-51. Web.
Monahan, Mary Beth. "Writing “Voiced” Arguments About Science Topics."Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy J Adolesc Adult Liter 57.1 (2013): 31-40. Web.
Kakh, Samira Y., Wan F. Adlina Wan Mansor, and Mohamad H. Zakaria. "Rhetorical Analysis Tasks to Develop Audience Awareness in Thesis Writing." Rhetorical Analysis Tasks to Develop Audience Awareness in Thesis Writing. ScienceDirect, 2014. Web.
Holstein, Sarah E., Katherine R. Mickley Steinmetz, and John D. Miles. "Teaching Science Writing in an Introductory Lab Course." (2015): n. pag. Web.
Aruffo, Christopher. "Turning Scientific Presentations Into Stories." Journal of College Science Teaching J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 045.01 (2015): n. pag. Web.
