Evaluation of an 8-week high school science communication course designed to read, write, and present scientific research

Abstract

The development of science writing and presentation skills is necessary for a successful science career. Too often these skills are not included in pre- or postsecondary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, leading to a disconnect between high schoolers' expectations for college preparedness and the skills needed to succeed in college. The Young Scientist Program Summer Focus recruits high school students from historically marginalized backgrounds to participate in 8-week summer internships at Washington University in St. Louis. Students conduct hands-on biomedical research projects under the mentorship of Washington University scientists (graduate students, postdoctorates, lab staff). Here, we present the curriculum for a science communication course that accompanies this early research experience. The course is designed to strengthen students' communication skills (critical reading, writing, presenting, and peer review) through a combination of weekly lectures and active learning methods. It prepares students for the capstone of their summer internship: writing a scientific paper and presenting their results at a closing symposium. We administered pre- and postprogram surveys to four Summer Focus cohorts to determine whether the course met its learning objectives. We found significant improvements in students' self-confidence in reading, interpreting, and communicating scientific data. Thus, this course provides a successful model for introducing science literacy and communication skills that are necessary for any career in STEM. We provide a detailed outline of the course structure and content so that this training can be incorporated into any undergraduate and graduate research programs.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Strong communication skills are necessary for a successful scientific career. Here, we describe the curriculum for a science communication course designed to accompany high school students participating in a summer biomedical research program. The course aims to improve their scientific literacy and communication skills. Students learn to read and understand scientific literature, write a paper about their summer research project, present their results, and provide feedback to peers. We found significant improvements in students' self-confidence in reading, interpreting, and communicating scientific data after completing the course. This successful model serves as a guide for students participating in their first research experience and provides the skills for success in future science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education and careers. The curriculum presented here can be easily adapted for any research program, including undergraduate summer research experiences and graduate student laboratory rotations.

Keywords: high school; presentation skills; science communication; summer research; writing skills.

Figure 1.

Writing Course learning goals. Diagram illustrating the four main tenets of science communication and literacy that comprise the Writing Course curriculum: critical reading (dark brown; top left), writing (light brown; top right), presenting (light blue; bottom left), and collaboration (dark blue; bottom right). Example assignments pertaining to each learning goal are listed on the colored rings.

Figure 2.

Writing Course structure. Diagram highlighting the flow of content covered during the Writing Course. Colored arrows denote the course learning goals and their corresponding weeks in the syllabus. Bullet points list assignments and activities used to achieve each learning goal.

Figure 3.

“Hourglass” approach to structuring Introduction and Discussion sections. Model summarizing the main contents and flow of a scientific paper or presentation. Guiding phrases are provided to help students structure their own Introduction (broad to narrow) and Discussion (narrow to broad) sections.

Figure 4.

Students completed self-assessment surveys before and after participating in the Writing Course. A: preprogram survey responses to questions that gauged the students’ familiarity and experiences with reading, writing, and interpreting scientific papers before completing the Writing Course (n = 45). Stacked bar charts denote the proportion of students with each response per question: Yes, Not Sure, and No. B: comparison of pre- and postprogram assessments of the students’ self-reported confidence in scientific communication, critical reading, and peer review skills (preprogram: n = 45; postprogram: n = 35). For most questions, we observed significant increases in positive sentiment responses after completing the Writing Course. Diverging bar charts denote the proportion of students with each response per question. Survey responses were reported on a modified seven-item Likert scale ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001; assessed by Fisher’s exact test.