The primary purpose for asking students to produce Lab Write-Ups within lower division college courses is to give students a low-risk opportunity to write within the science disciplines prior to being expected to perform at higher levels in future upper division courses and/or professional contexts. This updated CATS shares student thoughts and performance for the second cohort (Spring 2025) of Lab Write-Up implementation into my CHM 130AA and 151AA sections.
Writing is an essential science literacy skill that can be broken down into three purposes: 1. Writing to demonstrate content, 2. Writing with conventions in a discipline, and 3. Writing to learn. While quizzes and interviews are helpful for demonstrating content and peer reviews or self reflections are great for asking students to write to learn, the Lab Write-Up is an optimal mode to write with conventions in a discipline. Scaffolding the experience with steps for students to succeed at this technical writing is essential, but developing a student’s ability to formulate an introduction to a claim, results from evidence observed, discussion points given sound reasoning, and concluding remarks to propel their inquiry forward prepares them for expectations in future scientific endeavors.
Since the last iteration of the Lab Write-Up and Peer Review Templates for Fall 2024, updates have been made based on prior student, teacher, and support staff feedback:
- A learning outcome was added to the Lab Write-Up rubric (2a. Collecting and recording experimental data precisely) while two existing learning outcomes were combined into one (5b. Use scientific literature and resources to gather information on chemical topics, avoiding plagiarism with proper citation).
- Sentence starters were added to the Flow Map Outline section of the Lab Write-Up Template to prompt students to know what is asked of them (given the alignment to the learning outcomes being assessed) in each section more clearly.
- Criteria for peer reviewers to assess a peer’s work were updated in the Peer Review Template to specify specific prompts (learning outcomes) asked of students in their writing.
- The number of total Lab Write-ups was reduced while the scaffolding activities (introduction to claim-evidence-reasoning writing and effectively evaluating sources) and assignments were increased across the semester.
A survey was conducted at the completion of the Spring 2025. Samples of student feedback include:
- “The template helped me organize my thoughts and write scientifically. It made sure I included all the necessary parts of a lab report and supported my claims with evidence.”
- “I liked them once I got used to the concept, expectations from the instructor were very high for these, which is what I expect of a STEM track course.”
- “I would have personally preferred more direction. Outline was quite vague and it was usually up to us to decide what to write about, which left a lot up to interpretation. I value sample papers very highly because they help me to see how my professor wites and what they are looking for more specifically. Making one available would have helped me a lot.”
From these select comments, it appears the updates to the outline prompts assisted students in preparing to write Lab Write-Ups without losing rigor. However, students are still concerned about meeting my expectations if they do not have writing samples directly from me. While I do share student examples, I explicitly share that the student examples are not A+ examples, but rather should give them a reference point to start.
As for learning outcome mastery, the following breakdown was observed per course per semester (21 students each for Fall and Spring in CHM 130AA section and 60 students in the Fall compared to 66 students in the Spring in CHM 151AA sections) for the learning outcomes assessed using Lab Write-ups:
2a. Collecting and recording experimental data precisely (eg. mass, temperature, volume)
- CHM 151AA 73% mastery in Spring 2025
- CHM 130AA 86% mastery in Spring 2025
3a. Analyzing data using statistical and graphical methods
- CHM 151AA 18% mastery in Fall increased to 53% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 57% mastery in Fall decreased to 33% mastery in Spring
3b. Identifying and accounting for sources of error and uncertainty (e.g., procedural, mechanistic, random)
- CHM 151AA 43% mastery in Fall increased to 62% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 57% mastery in Fall increased to 67% mastery in Spring
4b. Evaluating the validity of experimental results
- CHM 151AA 53% mastery in Fall increased to 86% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 38% mastery in Fall increased to 81% mastery in Spring
4c. Identifying logical connections between chemical principles and experimental data
- CHM 151AA 92% mastery in Fall decreased to 73% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 81% mastery in Fall increased to 86% mastery in Spring
5b. Use scientific literature and resources to gather information on chemical topics, avoiding plagiarism with proper citation
- CHM 151AA 72% and 42% (avoid plagiarism) mastery in Fall combined into one learning outcome at 70% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 43% and 48% (avoid plagiarism) mastery in Fall combined into one learning outcome at 57% mastery in Spring
6a. Communicating findings clearly and effectively
- CHM 151AA 33% mastery in Fall increased to 61% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 67% mastery in Fall increased to 95% mastery in Spring
6b. Using appropriate scientific terminology and units
- CHM 151AA 82% mastery in Fall decreased to 70% mastery in Spring
- CHM 130AA 43% mastery in Fall increased to 81% mastery in Spring
From these results, we can see that students in the Spring 2025 cohort experienced increased mastery in all learning outcomes assessed compared to the Fall 2024 cohort except for (3a) analysis using statistics or graphs in the CHM 130AA section, as well as (4c) identifying logical connections between principles and data and (6b) using appropriate terms and units in the CHM 151AA sections. Meanwhile, the CHM 130AA section performed particularly better in the second cohort when (6a) communicating findings clearly and effectively and the CHM 151AA sections performed much better in the second cohort when (4b) evaluating the validity of experimental results.
This CATS presents an update on the implementation of Lab Write-Ups to foster and assess science literacy among lower-division chemistry students at EMCC. The Spring 2025 iteration aimed to provide structured, low-risk opportunities for students in CHM 130AA and 151AA to engage in discipline-specific writing, bridging foundational skills with expectations of upper-division coursework and professional life. Revisions included enhanced rubric criteria, clearer sentence starters aligned to learning outcomes, and refined peer review prompts. Survey feedback highlighted improved student understanding of scientific writing structure, though some still desired more direct examples. Quantitative data showed increased mastery in most targeted learning outcomes compared to Fall 2024, especially in communicating findings and evaluating experimental validity. Minor declines in specific outcomes, such as statistical analysis and the use of appropriate terminology, indicate areas for further scaffolding. Potential next steps for consideration include offering expert-level sample write-ups and assessment of using statistics and graphics earlier in the semester. Meanwhile, a new template option that allows students to opt for any credible source over peer-reviewed ones, offering flexibility while maintaining rigor, will be implemented in Fall 2025. Student responses and performance results from the Spring 2025 cohort support iterative, feedback-driven design of writing-intensive assignments to enhance scientific literacy and student confidence.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Lab Write-Up Example_Spring 2025_CHM 130AA | 1007.14 KB |
| Lab Write-Up Example_Spring 2025_CHM 151AA | 538.19 KB |