Embedded Files
Introduction
Introduction
Public Health focuses on disease prevention and health promotion, beyond individual patient care. Writing in Public Health is used to communicate vital information that empowers individuals to be healthy and to disseminate research findings. The writer's confidence and uniqueness come into play in achieving this goal.
This project addresses the issue of enhancing undergraduate students' confidence in their writing abilities and helping them develop a unique writing voice within a blended learning environment.
According to the literature, students’ struggles in writing often relate to staying focused on the topic, synthesizing literature, and developing key ideas. Still, they benefit when various writing strategies are woven together to address specific course assignments (Scott et al., 2020).
Transformative pedagogy principles can help students develop distinct voices in academic writing classes (Vengadasalam, 2020). Providing timely feedback for text revision is crucial for improving writing quality (Wischgoll, 2017)
Study setting, population and justification
Study setting, population and justification
The study was conducted in a semester-long blended undergraduate Public Health writing class, HPS 307: Public Health Narratives (Spring 2024) at the University of Arizona, with about 40 students enrolled with little or no prior experience in public health writing.
The teaching approach is interactive, focusing on peer review and collaborative learning. The format is a blend of lectures, discussions, and high-impact learning activities, purely in-person. This study was conducted in collaboration with the course Lecturer, Dr Laura Gronewold.
TAR question
TAR question
How can we effectively enhance undergraduate students’ confidence in their writing abilities and help them develop a unique writing voice through targeted classroom activities and exercises?
Approach / Methods
Approach / Methods
Learning goals and outcomes for participants
Enhanced writing confidence and developing a unique writing voice.
Instructional strategies
1. Brainstorming Workshop: Active engagement in generating ideas.
2. Guided Reflection: Structured self-reflection on identity and biases.
3. Literary Analysis: Exposure to diverse writing voices.
4. Scenario-Based Writing: Application of skills to real-world contexts; writing positionality statements.
Assessment techniques:
Targeted Classroom Activity: Specific peer writing workshop designed to enhance writing confidence and voice through writing exercises and discussions on positionality statements.
Pre and post-intervention student surveys: Surveys were administered to gauge students’ self-reported confidence levels, perceptions of their writing voice, and experiences with the implemented activities.
Link to data collection tool: https://forms.gle/syWGUZw3ZgTFwTKz5
https://forms.gle/xP8RvXDM4A6ZKEGq8
Data analysis:
Qualitative Analysis:
Thematic Coding: Identifying recurring patterns or concepts in student responses.
Quantitative Analysis:
Descriptive Statistics: Relevant summary statistics and distributions for survey responses (e.g., confidence scales).
Results
Results
On a scale of 1-5, pre-intervention, students had proportionately lower writing confidence scores.
On a scale of 1-5, pre-intervention, students had proportionately lower writing confidence scores.
Post-intervention students' writing confidence scores improved, with 17% with scores of 5.
Post-intervention students' writing confidence scores improved, with 17% with scores of 5.
Perceptions of personal unique writing voice showed higher proportions in the lower score categories before the workshop.
Perceptions of personal unique writing voice showed higher proportions in the lower score categories before the workshop.
The proportions of students with higher perceptions of unique writing voices increased significantly after the workshop.
The proportions of students with higher perceptions of unique writing voices increased significantly after the workshop.
Table 1 shows variations in writing confidence and unique writing voice before and after the workshop. There was a significant improvement in writing confidence after the workshop (p=0.007). Students had a higher score in their perception of their unique writing voices after the workshop, though this was not statistically significant (p=0.127). The mean scores improved for both parameters.
When comparing the adoption of a writing process it was found that the proportions were higher post-intervention. On the other hand, a smaller proportion of students applied no specific writing process.
When comparing the adoption of a writing process it was found that the proportions were higher post-intervention. On the other hand, a smaller proportion of students applied no specific writing process.
Pre- and post-intervention, the students reported their application of writing processes: twice the number of students applied a process in their writing compared to those who do not follow any particular process.
The less encouraged processes (writing only based on the structure or word count in the instructions, writing a first draft without a plan) were proportionately less after the intervention, though "Jumping right into the essay" was comparable between both groups. The more encouraged processes (starting with a writing outline/plan, starting with writing one's ideas, then doing a draft then carefully editing the draft) showed a marked improvement after the workshop.
Discussion / Lessons Learned
Discussion / Lessons Learned
During workshops and classes, participants demonstrated keen interest and achieved 100% participation. Through the workshops they were confronted with their learning needs and those of their peers.
Investigating the optimal number of workshops for enhanced learning outcomes is indeed a valuable area for further research. Researchers could explore questions such as Threshold Effect (diminishing returns), Saturation Point, Long-Term Retention, and Individual Differences.
The in-class workshop technique could be adapted and explored for other learning environments like engineering, and computer science where innovation and creativity are encouraged.
I learned how to draw on the curiosity of students to create a learning environment that is both participatory and collaborative, encouraging the use of various pedagogical strategies. Dr Laura Gronewold achieved this effortlessly by giving clear instructions and allowing students to maintain autonomy while learning.
Acknowledgments
I signed up for TAR because of my interest in teaching, I wanted for the first time to get some formal training in teaching, but I got so much more! My heartfelt thanks go to the following for helping me successfully push through the TAR project:
Dr. Kristin Winet and Dr. Byron Hempel, my amazing TAR instructors. Kristin had a unique grace in being a good listener. I watched and learned from the way she came fresh to each class, gently moderating, guiding, and leading us to our learning. Kristin called it "learning to teach, by teaching to learn" and she couldn't be more correct. I was blown away by Byron's calm and confident mastery of "everything"! From his fluid elevator pitch to his easy Excel and graphics skills, not to mention his TAR knowledge. You both are the example of a 'winning team! Thanks for teaching me and getting me to thoroughly enjoy myself while learning.
Dr Laura Gronewold worked with me through this project and made me feel so welcome and respected in her class. From the first moment until the last she made a part of her class. Your unique teaching style, your energy, and the love and admiration the students and TAs is testament to your personal success. It's not often you meet a professional so warm yet so accomplished. Thank you for everything, Laura!
My fellow TARS; Joe, Josie, Paola, and my 'TAR baddies' (Heather, Joanna, and Sushma), thank you for sharing a wonderful experience with me. You helped me keep the pace. We made it!
References
Scott, D.J., Ulmer-Krol, S., & Ribeiro, J. (2020). Enhancing the Academic Writing Abilities of First-Year Bachelor of Education Students in a Blended Learning Environment. The International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 32, 87-98.
Sarbani Sen Vengadasalam (2020). Transformative Pedagogy and Student Voice. Using S.E.A. Principles in Teaching Academic Writing. VOL. 3 NO. 2 (2020): Fall Issue DOI: https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v3i2.95
Wischgoll, A. (2017). Improving Undergraduates’ and Postgraduates’ Academic Writing Skills with Strategy Training and Feedback. Frontiers in Education, 2, 264409. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00033
About the Author
About the Author
Oluchi Joan Kanma-Okafor is a physician, researcher and passionate PhD student specializing in Health Behavior and Health Promotion and a minor in Global Health at the Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona. With a strong commitment to Public Health, Oluchi is driven by a desire to understand and influence health behaviors at both individual and community levels.
Oluchi’s academic journey is marked by rigorous study, dedicated teaching, and practical experience in the field of Public Health. Before her PhD, she gained a solid foundation in health sciences and research methodologies, which she now applies to her doctoral studies. Her scholarly impact is evident through her publications and citations, which reflect her commitment to advancing health knowledge and practice.
Page updated
Report abuse