How the teaching methods used in STEM undergraduate courses at research-intensive universities are influenced by the discipline and beliefs of the faculty

Abstract

The adoption of writing-to-learn (WTL) practises in undergraduate STEM courses has been slowed down by the lack of theoretical and conceptual frameworks to systematically guide research and empirical evidence about how many intrapersonal characteristics and contextual factors, in particular faculty beliefs and disciplinary cultures, influence faculty use of writing assignments in their teaching. Due to a lack of theoretical and conceptual frameworks, these attempts have been impeded. The lack of theoretical and conceptual frameworks that may hasten the adoption of WTL practises in undergraduate STEM courses has hampered these efforts. We invited academics in the science, technology, engineering, and math departments at 63 of the most research-intensive colleges in the United States to participate in a national survey to better understand these issues. The statistics showed that, on average, 70% of the teaching staff was required to produce written materials.
 On the other hand, the needed types of writing varied widely depending on the personnel's demographics, the subject matter, and their points of view. More precisely, we can state that the faculty's demographics caused 5% of the variation in the number of writing assignments. Furthermore, the faculty's epistemic views, attitudes on the effectiveness of WTL practises, and contextual resources and constraints that impact how they employ writing in their instruction accounted for an extra 30% of the variance. Finally, the faculty's specialization might explain an extra 6% of the variance. The findings suggest that the key intervention target should be the viewpoints held by faculty members and draw attention to the need for discipline-specific techniques to promote the adoption of WTL practices.