Argument-Driven Inquiry: Using the Laboratory To Improve Undergraduates’ Science Writing Skills through Meaningful Science Writing, Peer-Review, and Revision

Abstract

This paper presents preliminary evidence supporting the use of peer review in undergraduate science as a means to improve student writing and to alleviate barriers, such as lost class time, by incorporation of the peer-review process into the laboratory component of the course. The study was conducted in a single section of an undergraduate general chemistry laboratory course offered at a large two-year community college located in the southeastern United States. The chemistry laboratory course was taught using Argument-Driven Inquiry, an instructional model that incorporates double-blind group peer review of student laboratory reports, and allows students to revise their reports based on the peer reviews. The reports written for each laboratory activity were used to examine changes in the students’ writing skills over time and to identify aspects of science writing that were the most difficult for the undergraduates in this context. The reviews generated by the students were used to evaluate student engagement in the peer-review process. The results of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the reports and reviews indicate that the participants made significant improvements in the their ability to write in science and were able to evaluate the quality of their peers’ writing with a relatively high degree of accuracy, but also struggled with several aspects of science writing.