Biology Department, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 12;13(9):e0203109. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203109. eCollection 2018.
Scientific writing, particularly quantitative writing, is difficult to master. To help undergraduate students write more clearly about data, we sought to deconstruct writing into discrete, specific elements. We focused on statements typically used to describe data found in the results sections of research articles (quantitative comparative statements, QC). In this paper, we define the essential components of a QC statement and the rules that govern those components. Clearly defined rules allowed us to quantify writing quality of QC statements (4C scoring). Using 4C scoring, we measured student writing gains in a post-test at the end of the term compared to a pre-test (37% improvement). In addition to overall score, 4C scoring provided insight into common writing mistakes by measuring presence/absence of each essential component. Student writing quality in lab reports improved when they practiced writing isolated QC statements. Although we observed a significant increase in writing quality in lab reports describing a simple experiment, we noted a decrease in writing quality when the complexity of the experimental system increased. Our data suggest a negative correlation of writing quality with complexity. We discuss how our data aligns with existing cognitive theories of writing and how science instructors might improve the scientific writing of their students.
科学写作,尤其是定量写作,很难掌握。为了帮助本科生更清晰地描述数据,我们试图将写作分解为离散的、具体的元素。我们专注于通常用于描述研究文章结果部分(定量比较陈述,QC)中数据的陈述。在本文中,我们定义了 QC 陈述的基本组成部分和支配这些组成部分的规则。明确的规则允许我们量化 QC 陈述的写作质量(4C 评分)。使用 4C 评分,我们在学期末的后测中测量了学生相对于前测的写作成绩提高情况(提高了 37%)。除了总分数之外,4C 评分还通过衡量每个基本组成部分的存在/不存在,提供了对常见写作错误的深入了解。当学生练习撰写孤立的 QC 陈述时,他们的实验报告写作质量有所提高。尽管我们观察到描述简单实验的实验报告的写作质量有显著提高,但当实验系统的复杂性增加时,写作质量却有所下降。我们的数据表明,写作质量与复杂性呈负相关。我们讨论了我们的数据如何与现有的写作认知理论相一致,以及科学教师如何提高学生的科学写作水平。