Loading…
Easing Your Pain: A Method for Evaluating Research Writing From Students
Throughout their undergraduate and graduate careers, students are assigned various types of papers that require scientific writing style. The scope of these assignments include laboratory reports that require only graphing and statements of findings; abstract assignments with critical summaries incl...
Saved in:
Published in: | Measurement in physical education and exercise science 2004, Vol.8 (1), p.43-52 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Throughout their undergraduate and graduate careers, students are assigned various types of papers that require scientific writing style. The scope of these assignments include laboratory reports that require only graphing and statements of findings; abstract assignments with critical summaries included; abbreviated research papers, including results, discussion, and data analysis(es); reviews of research literature; journal manuscript format for a small limited design; and a journal manuscript format for a thesis or dissertation topic with expectation for submission to a research journal. Adopting the scientific writing style is challenging for even the most talented student-writers; therefore, at all stages of the writing process, faculty have the responsibility of helping the student-writer by offering suggestions with positive and constructive comments on the theoretical foundation, design and analysis, and writing style and format. Of these responsibilities, the most time-intensive and least favored is offering writing style and format corrections. In this article, the authors offer their method as an option for effectively evaluating a paper for format and writing style that allows for the extent of edits to be evaluated quantitatively. (Contains 3 figures.) |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1091-367X 1532-7841 |
DOI: | 10.1207/s15327841mpee0801_4 |