Science talk and CER writing

Abstract

Will the introduction of science argumentation and academic discourse impact writing scores in science as measured with Claim Evidence Reasoning (CER) writing assessments? This question was investigated by comparing groups of graduate students before and after exposure to techniques for argumentation in the science classroom. Scores of graduate student CER writing assignments from previous semesters were compared to scores of writings from students who had exposure to training and practice. Additionally, scores of participants' students were analyzed for changes after the teacher received some training on classroom discourse. Participants were introduced to meaningful, engaging prompts and techniques. They were asked to bring the techniques back to their own classrooms and asked to report any changes they saw in the writing of their students. Results of graduate student writing showed measurable difference when compared to graduate students from previous semesters without the same training. Data from classrooms showed more evidence-based responses compared to CER writing scores before techniques were used. Graduate students rated their confidence in science writing and teaching writing for science before and after exposure to techniques. Comparing pre- and post- Treatment survey results suggests no statistically significant difference. Data indicates that in the future, the MSSE program may benefit by including techniques in the coursework and that classroom teachers desire more training on techniques. Due to the limited sample size, it is recommended that additional research address the impacts of science discourse on student writing in the science classroom. The investigation showed promise regarding improvements in comfort levels for teachers in use of discourse and writing. Results indicate that an increased repertoire of techniques for teachers may lead to improved student writing skills.