Graduate Engineering Peer Review Groups: Developing Communicators and Community

Kelly J. Cunningham

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Tampa, Florida
Publication Date: June 15, 2019
Start Date: June 15, 2019
End Date: June 19, 2019
Conference Session: Graduate Student Writing and Communication
Tagged Division: Graduate Studies
Page Count: 16
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--32878
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/32878
Download Count: 557

Paper Authors

biography

Kelly J. Cunningham University of Virginia orcid.org/0000-0003-4101-3193

visit author page

Kelly Cunningham is the director of the Graduate Writing Lab in the School of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Virginia. She holds a PhD in applied linguistics & technology and human-computer interaction (co-majors) from Iowa State University of Science & Technology and an MA in intercultural studies/TESOL. She has worked with ESL students since 2007 and in graduate communication support since 2014. Her research draws from qualitative methods, appraisal analysis, corpus linguistics, and discourse analysis.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Communication skills during graduate school are a critical concern for both native and nonnative speakers of English [1] and key for engineering employment in both academia and industry [2]. However, writing in graduate school can cause considerable anxiety and stress [3] and its isolation and unknowns [4] often lead to feelings of fear and failure among graduate students [5]. The present study investigates one low cost intervention, peer review groups, to help engineering graduate students develop confidence and overcome the isolation and unknowns associated with writing in graduate school.

Graduate engineering peer review groups consist of 4-10 graduate students in related disciplines that meet weekly to review and revise their work. These facilitated supportive communities center on continuing participation and discussion-based feedback. Groups meet for a minimum of 1 semester but most continue for much longer.

The graduate engineering peer review groups considered in the present study covered a number of engineering disciplines: chemical, aerospace, computer, biomedical, civil and systems/information engineering. Each group met weekly for 1.5 hours and reviewed 1-3 pieces of student work per meeting in a discussion-based format focused on constructive feedback and revision. Data was collected through surveys and observations over five years across two large public research universities in the United States. At each weekly 1.5-hour group meeting, structured observational notes were taken by the facilitator using an online form. Review and paper features were also captured. Each semester (Fall, Spring, and Summer) surveys were administered to group members to gauge their perceptions of the groups, refine practices, and identify benefits for graduate students. The present study focuses on the open-ended responses to survey questions over the five year period.

The results suggest that the peer review groups instilled confidence in students and made writing less intimidating for them while increasing their perceived productivity. Students noted that the groups led to both immediate (revisions on a draft) and long term (skills, habits, perspective) communication development which spanned both receptive and productive skills. They also valued that the groups helped them improve and feel more confident in giving and receiving constructive feedback through regular practice. Importance of the groups in developing local and disciplinary community in a supportive environment was also highlighted. Students found that the community, discussion, and skills they developed helped them to be better engineers and researchers, as they saw these skills and practices as key to engineering. The interconnected development of skills, products, perspective and attitude were made possible by the PRG structure and the supportive disciplinary community it represented. The group model is recommended as a low investment way to provide graduate communication support to engineering students.

[1] S. Simpson, "The Problem of Graduate-Level Writing Support - Building a Cross-Campus Graduate Writing Initiative," Writing Program Administration, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 95-118, 2012. [2] D. Vest, M. Long, L. Thomas, and M. E. Palmquist, "Relating Communication Training to Workplace Requirements: The Perspective of New Engineers," IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 11-17, 1995. [3] P. M. Ross, S. Burgin, C. Aitchison, and J. Catterall, "Research Writing in the Sciences - Liminal Territory and High Emotion," Journal of Learning Design, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14-27, 2011. [4] L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, "To Be or Not to Be? The Challenges of Learning Academic Work," in Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators, L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, Eds. New York, NY: Springer, 2011, pp. 1-13. [5] D. Starke-Meyerring, "The Paradox of Writing in Doctoral Education: Student Experiences," in Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators, L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, Eds. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2011, pp. 75-95.

Citation
Format

Cunningham, K. J. (2019, June), Graduate Engineering Peer Review Groups: Developing Communicators and Community Paper presented at 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Tampa, Florida. 10.18260/1-2--32878

TY - CPAPER
AB - Communication skills during graduate school are a critical concern for both native and nonnative speakers of English [1] and key for engineering employment in both academia and industry [2]. However, writing in graduate school can cause considerable anxiety and stress [3] and its isolation and unknowns [4] often lead to feelings of fear and failure among graduate students [5]. The present study investigates one low cost intervention, peer review groups, to help engineering graduate students develop confidence and overcome the isolation and unknowns associated with writing in graduate school.

Graduate engineering peer review groups consist of 4-10 graduate students in related disciplines that meet weekly to review and revise their work. These facilitated supportive communities center on continuing participation and discussion-based feedback. Groups meet for a minimum of 1 semester but most continue for much longer.

The graduate engineering peer review groups considered in the present study covered a number of engineering disciplines: chemical, aerospace, computer, biomedical, civil and systems/information engineering. Each group met weekly for 1.5 hours and reviewed 1-3 pieces of student work per meeting in a discussion-based format focused on constructive feedback and revision.

Data was collected through surveys and observations over five years across two large public research universities in the United States. At each weekly 1.5-hour group meeting, structured observational notes were taken by the facilitator using an online form. Review and paper features were also captured. Each semester (Fall, Spring, and Summer) surveys were administered to group members to gauge their perceptions of the groups, refine practices, and identify benefits for graduate students. The present study focuses on the open-ended responses to survey questions over the five year period.

The results suggest that the peer review groups instilled confidence in students and made writing less intimidating for them while increasing their perceived productivity. Students noted that the groups led to both immediate (revisions on a draft) and long term (skills, habits, perspective) communication development which spanned both receptive and productive skills. They also valued that the groups helped them improve and feel more confident in giving and receiving constructive feedback through regular practice. Importance of the groups in developing local and disciplinary community in a supportive environment was also highlighted. Students found that the community, discussion, and skills they developed helped them to be better engineers and researchers, as they saw these skills and practices as key to engineering. The interconnected development of skills, products, perspective and attitude were made possible by the PRG structure and the supportive disciplinary community it represented. The group model is recommended as a low investment way to provide graduate communication support to engineering students.

[1] S. Simpson, &quot;The Problem of Graduate-Level Writing Support - Building a Cross-Campus Graduate Writing Initiative,&quot; Writing Program Administration, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 95-118, 2012.
[2] D. Vest, M. Long, L. Thomas, and M. E. Palmquist, &quot;Relating Communication Training to Workplace Requirements: The Perspective of New Engineers,&quot; IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 11-17, 1995.
[3] P. M. Ross, S. Burgin, C. Aitchison, and J. Catterall, &quot;Research Writing in the Sciences - Liminal Territory and High Emotion,&quot; Journal of Learning Design, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14-27, 2011.
[4] L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, &quot;To Be or Not to Be? The Challenges of Learning Academic Work,&quot; in Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators, L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, Eds. New York, NY: Springer, 2011, pp. 1-13.
[5] D. Starke-Meyerring, &quot;The Paradox of Writing in Doctoral Education: Student Experiences,&quot; in Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators, L. McAlpine and C. Amundsen, Eds. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2011, pp. 75-95.
AU - Kelly J. Cunningham
CY - Tampa, Florida
DA - 2019/06/15
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Graduate Engineering Peer Review Groups: Developing Communicators and Community
UR - https://peer.asee.org/32878
DO - 10.18260/1-2--32878
ER -