An official website of the United States government
Engineering undergraduates’ academic writing experiences prior to entry-level engineering lab courses can be classified into three different groups: a group with both rhetorically-focused writing (e.g., first-year-composition) and technical writing courses; a group with only rhetorically-focused writing courses; and a group with no rhetorically-focused writing or technical writing courses. Using a lens of transfer theories that explain how much knowledge from one context is used or adapted in new contexts, these three groups can be called concurrent, vertical, and absent transfer groups respectively. This study, which is part of a larger project developing and implementing writing-focused modules in engineering labs, aims to investigate undergraduates’ perspectives on readiness, writing transfer, and effectiveness of writing instructions in engineering lab report writing through a student survey. End-of-term online surveys (n = 40) of undergraduates in entry-level engineering lab courses were collected from three distinctive universities: an urban, commuter, public research university; an urban, private, teaching-focused university; and a rural, public, teaching-focused university. The survey questions have three parts: 1) student perspectives in writing in engineering disciplines; 2) how students use prior writing knowledge when writing lab reports in engineering lab courses; and 3) how engineering lab course writing instructions impact students’ engineering lab report writing. Findings suggest that the three transfer groups present statistical distinctions on the readiness of writing engineering lab reports (concurrent group as the highest and absent group as the lowest). The three groups also show different perspectives on how their freshmen writing courses contributed their engineering lab report writing. The concurrent transfer group believed freshmen writing instruction regarding “focus on purpose” contributed most when they write lab reports, while the greatest number of vertical transfer group students mentioned “knowledge about format and structure” was most helpful. Many absent transfer students valued “identifying problems or questions” instructed from their freshmen writing-intensive philosophy course as the content they used most when writing lab reports. Ultimately, the analysis of the data suggested that despite their perceived preparedness for writing lab reports, most of the students felt their skills improved as a result of engaging in lab report writing activities.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on August 21, 2026
Student perceptions of supports and barriers for transferring quantitative reasoning in introductory biology lab courses
ABSTRACT Quantitative reasoning is a critical skill in biology and has been highlighted as a core competency byVision and Change. Despite its importance, students often struggle to apply mathematical skills in new contexts in biology, a process called transfer of knowledge. However, the supports and barriers that students perceive for this process remain unclear. To explore this further, we interviewed undergraduate students in an introductory biology lab course about how they understand and report the transfer of quantitative skills in these courses. We then applied these themes to the Step Back, Translate, and Extend (SBTE) framework to examine student perceptions of the supports and barriers to their knowledge transfer. Students reported different supports and barriers at each level of the transfer process. At the first step of the framework, the recognition level, students reported reflecting on previous chemistry, statistics, and physics learning as helpful cues to indicate a transfer opportunity. Others, however, reported perceiving math and science as separate subjects without overlap, causing a disconnect in their recognition of transferable knowledge. In the second level of the framework, students recall previous learning. Students reported repetition and positive dispositions toward science and math as supportive factors. In contrast, gaps of time between initial learning and new contexts and negative dispositions hindered recall ability. The final level of the SBTE framework focuses on application. Students reported being better able to apply previous learning to new contexts in the biology lab when they could relate their applied skills to “real-world” applications, external motivating factors, and future career goals. These students also reported proactively seeking outside resources to fill gaps in their understanding. Generating data in a lab setting was also mentioned by students as both a supportive factor of application when they felt confident in their answers and a hindrance to application when they felt unsure about its accuracy.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2225255
- PAR ID:
- 10655617
- Editor(s):
- Wright, L Kate
- Publisher / Repository:
- Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
- Volume:
- 26
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1935-7877
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Engineering undergraduates’ academic writing experiences prior to entry-level engineering lab courses can be classified into three different groups: a group with both rhetorically-focused writing (e.g., first-year-composition) and technical writing courses; a group with only rhetorically-focused writing courses; and a group with no rhetorically-focused writing or technical writing courses. Using a lens of transfer theories that explain how much knowledge from one context is used or adapted in new contexts, these three groups can be called concurrent, vertical, and absent transfer groups respectively. This study, which is part of a larger project developing and implementing writing-focused modules in engineering labs, aims to investigate undergraduates’ perspectives on readiness, writing transfer, and effectiveness of writing instructions in engineering lab report writing through a student survey. End-of-term online surveys (n = 40) of undergraduates in entry-level engineering lab courses were collected from three distinctive universities: an urban, commuter, public research university; an urban, private, teaching-focused university; and a rural, public, teaching-focused university. The survey questions have three parts: 1) student perspectives in writing in engineering disciplines; 2) how students use prior writing knowledge when writing lab reports in engineering lab courses; and 3) how engineering lab course writing instructions impact students’ engineering lab report writing. Findings suggest that the three transfer groups present statistical distinctions on the readiness of writing engineering lab reports (concurrent group as the highest and absent group as the lowest). The three groups also show different perspectives on how their freshmen writing courses contributed their engineering lab report writing. The concurrent transfer group believed freshmen writing instruction regarding “focus on purpose” contributed most when they write lab reports, while the greatest number of vertical transfer group students mentioned “knowledge about format and structure” was most helpful. Many absent transfer students valued “identifying problems or questions” instructed from their freshmen writing-intensive philosophy course as the content they used most when writing lab reports. Ultimately, the analysis of the data suggested that despite their perceived preparedness for writing lab reports, most of the students felt their skills improved as a result of engaging in lab report writing activities.more » « less
-
Engineering undergraduates’ academic writing experiences prior to entry-level engineering lab courses can be classified into three different groups: a group with both rhetorically-focused writing (e.g., first-year-composition) and technical writing courses; a group with only rhetorically-focused writing courses; and a group with no rhetorically-focused writing or technical writing courses. Using a lens of transfer theories that explain how much knowledge from one context is used or adapted in new contexts, these three groups can be called concurrent, vertical, and absent transfer groups respectively. This study, which is part of a larger project developing and implementing writing-focused modules in engineering labs, aims to investigate undergraduates’ perspectives on readiness, writing transfer, and effectiveness of writing instructions in engineering lab report writing through a student survey. End-of-term online surveys (n = 40) of undergraduates in entry-level engineering lab courses were collected from three distinctive universities: an urban, commuter, public research university; an urban, private, teaching-focused university; and a rural, public, teaching-focused university. The survey questions have three parts: 1) student perspectives in writing in engineering disciplines; 2) how students use prior writing knowledge when writing lab reports in engineering lab courses; and 3) how engineering lab course writing instructions impact students’ engineering lab report writing. Findings suggest that the three transfer groups present statistical distinctions on the readiness of writing engineering lab reports (concurrent group as the highest and absent group as the lowest). The three groups also show different perspectives on how their freshmen writing courses contributed their engineering lab report writing. The concurrent transfer group believed freshmen writing instruction regarding “focus on purpose” contributed most when they write lab reports, while the greatest number of vertical transfer group students mentioned “knowledge about format and structure” was most helpful. Many absent transfer students valued “identifying problems or questions” instructed from their freshmen writing-intensive philosophy course as the content they used most when writing lab reports. Ultimately, the analysis of the data suggested that despite their perceived preparedness for writing lab reports, most of the students felt their skills improved as a result of engaging in lab report writing activities.more » « less
-
Transfer of learning theory explains how learners can apply their previously acquired knowledge and skills in a new situation or context. In the context of writing transfer and lab report writing, first-year writing courses can act as one kind of previous learning experience or as a transfer source, and lower-division engineering labs can be the new situation or the transfer target. This preliminary study investigates how engineering students’ prior writing experience affects their lab report writing in lower-division introductory engineering labs. This study uses two distinct sites of first-year writing-intensive courses: one rhetorically-focused and one literature/philosophy-focused. We collected student samples (n = 9) from three universities offering these two distinct sites and approaches. We compared the content, outcomes, and writing expectations of the first-year writing-intensive courses offered by the three schools. Next, we conducted a rhetorical analysis of research papers collected from the writing-intensive course samples to identify each site's writing knowledge and skills. The same analysis was applied to the student’s first lab reports collected from the introductory engineering lab courses. We then compared the writing knowledge and skills between the first-year writing-intensive course samples and the engineering lab report samples to investigate how learning transfer occurred in the student writing at these three different sites. The criteria used to conduct the rhetorical analysis of writing samples focuses on writing outcomes most relevant to engineering lab report writing (relating to audience awareness, organizational structures, presentation/analysis/interpretation of lab data, use of primary and secondary sources, and document style design). We identify the prior writing knowledge and skills of the two distinct first-year writing-intensive course sites by investigating obvious points of productive transfer. This study provides a better understanding of how undergraduates use writing knowledge and skills earned from varying first-year writing-intensive contexts when writing their engineering labs.more » « less
-
Quantitative reasoning (QR) is the ability to apply mathematics and statistics in the context of real-life situations and scientific problems. It is an important skill that students require to make sense of complex biological phenomena and handle large datasets in biology courses and research as well as in professional contexts. Biology educators and researchers are responding to the increasing need for QR through curricular reforms and research into biology education. This qualitative study investigates how undergraduate biology instructors implement QR into their teaching. The study used pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and a QR framework to explore instructors’ instructional goals, strategies, and perceived challenges and affordances in undergraduate biology instruction. The participants included 21 biology faculty across various institutions in the United States, who intentionally integrated QR in their instruction. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data focusing on participants’ beliefs, experiences, and classroom practices. Findings indicated that instructors adapt their QR instruction based on course level and student preparedness. In lower-division courses, strategies emphasized building foundational skills, reducing math anxiety, and using scaffolded instruction to promote confidence. In upper-division courses, instructors expected greater math fluency but still encountered a wide range of student abilities, prompting a focus on correcting misconceptions in integrating math knowledge and fostering deeper conceptual understanding in biology. Many instructors reported that their personal and educational experiences, especially struggles with math, often shaped their inclusive and empathetic teaching practices. Additionally, instructors’ research backgrounds influenced instructional design, particularly in the use of authentic data, statistical tools, and real-world applications. Instructors’ teaching experiences led to refinement in lesson planning, pacing, and active learning strategies. Despite their efforts, instructors faced both internal and external challenges in implementing QR, including discomfort with teaching math, time limitations, student resistance, and institutional barriers. However, affordances such as departmental support, interdisciplinary collaboration, and curricular flexibility helped to overcome some of these challenges. This study highlights the complex relationships between instructors’ experiences, beliefs, and contextual factors in shaping QR instruction. This calls for professional development that supports reflective practice, builds interdisciplinary competence, and promotes instructional strategies that bridge biology and mathematics and will help instructors design a learning environment that better support students’ development of QR skills. These findings offer valuable guidance for professional development aimed at helping biology instructors incorporate quantitative reasoning into their teaching. Such efforts can better equip students to meet the quantitative demands of modern biology and promote their continued engagement in STEM fields through more inclusive and integrated instructional approaches.more » « less
