Laboratory lessons for writing and science

Written Communication

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 191-222

  Lerner, Neal ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

College science; Educational history; Educational reform; Laboratory report; Science education; Writing laboratory; Writing to learn

Indexed keywords

EID: 34347219730     PISSN: 07410883     EISSN: 15528472     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0741088307302765     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Alley, M. (1996). The craft of scientific writing. 3 rd ed. New York: Springer.
2. Anibel, F.G. (1926). Comparative effectiveness of the lecture-demonstration and individual laboratory method. Journal of Educational Research, 13 (5), 355-365.
3. Baldwin, C.S. (1894). The value of the office-hour in the teaching of rhetoric. Educational Review, 8 (3), 290-293.
4. Barnes, S.B. (1964). The entry of science and history in the college curriculum, 1865-1914. History of Education Quarterly, 4 (1), 44- 58.
5. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
6. Bazerman, C. (1999). The languages of Edison's light. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Campbell, J.P. (1891). Biological teaching in the colleges of the United States. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.
8. Carter, M., Ferzli, M., & Wiebe, E. (2004). Teaching genre to English first-language adults: A study of the laboratory report. Research in the Teaching of English, 38 (4), 395-417.
9. Chapman, O.L. (2001). Calibrated Peer Review™, an overview. Retrieved November 9, 2006, from http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu
10. Cooke, J.P. (1892). The value and limitations of laboratory practice in a scheme of liberal education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
11. Day, R.A. (1998). How to write & publish a scientific paper. 5 th ed. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx.
12. DeBoer, G.E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
13. Dewey, J. (1910). Science as subject-matter and as method. Science, 31 (787), 121-127.
14. Eliot, C.W. (1906). Laboratory teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 6 (8), 703-707.
15. Freer, P.C. (1898). The relation of science education in the secondary schools to that in the college and university. Science, 8 (190), 210-213.
16. Geller, A.E. (2005). " What's cool here?" Collaboratively learning genre in biology. In A. Herrington & C. Moran (Eds.), Genre across the curriculum (pp. 83-105). Logan: Utah State University Press.
17. Gerould, J.H. (1886). Personal notebook No. II. Field notebook of natural history (Renaur Special Collections Library, MS-507). Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College.
18. Gillen, C.M. (2006). Criticism and interpretation: Teaching the persuasive aspects of research articles. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 5, 34-38.
19. Glicksberg, C.I. (1950). In defense of college composition. College English, 12, 90- 98.
20. Grier, N.M. (1935). On the approval for accrediment of college science laboratories. Science Education, 19 (1), 19-23.
21. Griggs, F.E., Jr. (1997). Amos Eaton was right! Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 123 (1), 30-34.
22. Guralnick, S.M. (1975). Science and the ante-bellum American college. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.
23. Haas, C. (1994). Learning to read biology: One student's rhetorical development in college. Written Communication, 11, 43-84.
24. Hand, B., Wallace, C.W., & Yang, E.-M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (2), 131-149.
25. Herrington, A.J. (1985). Writing in academic settings: A study of the contexts for writing in two college chemical engineering courses. Research in the Teaching of English, 19 (4), 331-359.
26. Hodgins, J.G., & Machattie, A.T. (1871). Report of an inquiry in regard to schools of technical science in certain portions of the United States. Toronto, Canada: Hunter, Rose.
27. Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science and beyond the school laboratory. In J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 93-108). London: Routledge.
28. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
29. Hohenshell, L.M., & Hand, B. (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2-3), 261-289.
30. Horton, R.E. (1929). Measured outcomes of laboratory instruction. Science Education, 14 (1), 311-319.
31. Hosic, J.F. (1917). Reorganization of English in secondary schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education.
32. How to educate young scientists. (2006, July 3). The New York Times, p. A14.
33. Institute Archives, MIT Libraries. (2005). History of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering. Retrieved July 12, 2006, from http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/mithistory/histories-offices/ matsci.html
34. Kargon, R.H., & Knowles, S.G. (2002). Knowledge for use: Science, higher learning, and America's new industrial heartland, 1880-1915. Annals of Science, 59, 1-20.
35. Keys, C.W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115-130.
36. Keys, C.W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (10), 1065-1084.
37. Kitzhaber, A.R. (1990). Rhetoric in American colleges, 1850-1900. Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press.
38. Knisely, K. (2005). A student handbook for writing in biology. 2nd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
39. Lerner, N. (2005). The student-teacher writing conference and the desire for intimacy. College English, 68 (2), 186-208.
40. Leighton, R.W. (1935). Studies of laboratory methods of teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Brothers.
41. Mabery, C.F. (1893). How chemistry is best taught. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 15, 403-475.
42. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1908). Bulletin of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Catalogue of the officers and students with a statement of the requirements for admission and a description of the courses of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Author.
43. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1925). Report of the president, 1924-25. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Matthews, J.R., Bowen, J.M., & Matthews, R.W. (2000). Successful scientific writing. 2 nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45. McAllister, E.M. (1941). Amos Eaton: Scientist and educator, 1776-1842. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
46. McMillan, V.E. (2006). Writing papers in the biological sciences. 4 th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's.
47. Miller, C.R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.
48. Modern Language Association of America & National Council of Teachers of English. (1913). Report on the cost and labor of English teaching. Lawrence: University of Kansas.
49. Moore, R. (1993). Does writing about science improve learning about science? Journal of College Science Teaching, 22 (4), 212-217.
50. Moore, R. (1997). Writing to learn science. Fort Worth, TX: Saunders.
51. Moskovitz, C., & Kellogg, D. (2005). Primary science communication in the first-year writing course. College Composition and Communication, 57 (2), 307-334.
52. National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2003). The neglected "R": The need for a writing revolution. New York: College Board.
53. Paradis, J.G., & Zimmerman, M.L. (1997). The MIT guide to science and engineering communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. Patton, M., & Nagelhout, E. (2004). Literacy and learning in context: Biology students in the classroom and the lab. In B. Huot, B. Stroble, & C. Bazerman (Eds.), Multiple literacies for the 21st century (pp. 151-171). Creskill, NJ: Hampton.
55. Payne, V.F. (1932 a). The lecture-demonstration and individual laboratory methods compared: I. The literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 9 (5), 932-939.
56. Payne, V.F. (1932 b). The lecture-demonstration and individual laboratory methods compared: II. The distribution of time. Journal of Chemical Education, 9 (6), 1097-1102.
57. Pechenik, J. (2006). A short guide to writing about biology. 6 th ed. New York: Longman.
58. Pelaez, N.J. (2002). Problem-based writing with peer review improved academic performance in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 26 (3), 174-184.
59. Penrose, A.M., & Katz, S.B. (2004). Writing in the sciences: Exploring conventions of scientific discourse. 2 nd ed. New York: Longman.
60. Poteat, W.L. (1901). The laboratory as means of culture. School Science, 1 (6), 287-288.
61. Prichard, J.R. (2005). Writing to learn: An evaluation of the Calibrated Peer Review™ program in two neuroscience courses. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 4 (1), A34-A39.
62. Riedel, F.A. (1927). What, if anything, has really been proved as to the relative effectiveness of demonstration and laboratory methods in science-I. School Science and Mathematics, 27 (5), 512-519.
63. Rivard, L.P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (9), 969-983.
64. Rosen, S. (1955). A history of science teaching in the American public high school, 1820-1920. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University Graduate School of Education.
65. Rudd, J.A., Greenbowe, T.J., & Hand, B. (2001). Reshaping the general chemistry laboratory report using the science writing heuristic. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31, 230-234.
66. Rudd, J.A., Greenbowe, T.J., Hand, B.M., & Legg, M.L. (2001). Using the science writing heuristic to move toward an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum: An example from physical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78, 1680-1686.
67. Rudolph, F. (1962). The American college and university: A history. New York: Knopf.
68. Russell, D.R. (1991). Writing in the academic disciplines, 1870-1990. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
69. Scott, F.N. (1895). English at the University of Michigan. In W. M. Payne (Ed.), English in American universities (pp. 116-123). Boston: D.C. Heath.
70. Scudder, S.H. (1874, April 4). In the laboratory with Agassiz. Every Saturday, 16, 369-370.
71. Smith, H.R. (1918). Laboratory efficiency. School Science and Mathematics, 18 (2), 242-244.
72. Smith, L.G. (1903). The laboratory the place to teach fundamental principles. In Proceedings of the National Educational Association (p. 878). Winona, MN: National Educational Association.
73. Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
74. Thwing, C.F. (1906). A history of higher education in America. New York: Appleton.
75. Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90 (5), 403-418.
76. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Table 3. Enrollment in educational institutions, by level and control of institution: 1869-70 to fall 2012. Digest of Education Statistics. Retrieved February 19, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/ programs/digest/d02/tables/dt003.asp
77. Wendell, B. (1895). English at Harvard University. In W. M. Payne (Ed.), English in American universities (pp. 44-48). Boston: D.C. Heath.