Small project: Learning programme on writing scientific reports

Writing scientific reports is one of the most important tasks of scientists. In the degree programme in Environmental Sciences students practise writing such reports by composing practicals reports, semester papers and a Master’s thesis. In this written work they mostly do not receive systematic help,but instead receive personal feedback on their text drafts which they then use to improve them. This means that they mostly learn by correcting their mistakes.

This procedure has certain disadvantages. First, providing personalised feedback takes a lot of faculty time – particularly when there are many basic mistakes to correct, and explain comprehensively. Second, feedback discussions of texts and treatment of individual points generally occur in the “coincidental” order of their appearance in the text, and it is questionable how far the transfer of such point-by-point corrections to later written work is possible. Third, feedback discussions primarily address mistakes and measures for improvement, i.e. negative feedback. In this context a survey of Environmental Sciences students indicated that on average they regard their writing skills at the end of their studies as no better than at the beginning; that they feel more unsure when writing scientific texts than in other areas; and that they have difficulty handling writing crises. They firstly want differentiated feedback on their texts, and secondly better guidelines for producing written work.

For some years I have been trying to ease students’ writing of reports by providing a concrete set of guidelines. An initial very short introduction is made in the «Pflanzen- und Vegetationsökologie» [plant and vegetation ecology] course, where students write two reports on the investigations undertaken during the course. They receive a second, deeper introduction when they write a semester paper for me. These courses have really proved themselves, and students regularly identify them as very helpful. They make visible efforts to deploy the rules and recommendations in their texts, and frequently submit very good drafts. Even the discussion of texts has changed – students are at least partially aware of the weak points in their texts and ask questions about them themselves. Thus they take more of an active role, and I can give more advice and correct less.