Improving quantitative writing one sentence at a time.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30208079.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0203109 and PMC identifier 6135501.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
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.
Medical subject headings
- Science
- Writing