In Summer 2017, I taught Writing for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). The course was offered in the first summer mini-semester; we met twelve times over eight weeks for almost three and a half hours each meeting. It was an intense course, both for the students and for myself.
In addition to working on common STEM documents, like grant proposals and reports, we also read and responded to several rhetorical studies on STEM issues, like chapters from Lynda Walsh’s Scientists as Prophets, Stephen Katz’s The Ethic of Expediency, and Jeanne Fahnestock’s Accommodating Science.
Excerpts from Student Assessment of Instruction:
- From quantitative assessment:
- Overall assessment of instructor: 40% Excellent, 47% Very Good, 13% Good, 0% Fair, 0% Pooe]r, 0% Blank
- From qualitative comments:
- I wish this class was the whole summer because some of the topics we discussed are hard. In order to master these topics more time was needed our professor did an excellent job with the amount of time she had.
- My biggest complaint about this course would be the pace in a short 6 week summer session. For this course to be offered in the summer, I believe it needs to be a full summer course given the sheer amount of writing that goes into it. Aside from the pacing, the course was a great one that I feel has enhanced my overall writing.