Towards a Transformative Collaboration: Technical Writing, Engineering, Industry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract This paper reports on a work in progress collaboration between Engineering and English faculty at Texas A&M Qatar, and examines the initial impact of the team's reorganization of a required Technical Professional Writing course on engineering students' educational experience as they learn effective and relevant professional communication skills in the field of engineering; as they network with mentors from various industries; and as they train to be effective writers and competitive candidates in their engineering fields. While many engineering programs require several technical writing courses, our undergraduate engineering students at Texas A&M University Qatar take only ONE course in Technical Professional Communication (ENGL 210), followed by a selection of WI courses spread out in their degree plan. However, faculty still identified a continuing gap between their expectations of students' communication skills and what students have demonstrated in classes, including upper-division and capstone courses. How can we ensure the continuity of certain writing tools and skills throughout the student's writing journey at TAMUQ? How can we present opportunities for English and engineering faculty to share their assessments, rubrics, or other teaching tools so as to effectively support the student's communication development? Our research group is comprised of two Engineering faculty and two English faculty (one of whom is also a Writing in the Disciplines Coordinator – WID). Through extensive meetings and discussions, sharing of assignments and students' work, and review of course objectives and assessments, our team redesigned the required ENGL 210 to focus on what engineering faculty identify as relevant aspects of writing in the field of engineering: problem statements, research and literature reviews, project proposals, progress reports, and scientific poster design, with additional focus on integrating UX design and data visualization in the students' projects. We created assessments that more closely align with engineering faculty and industry professionals' expectations for effective oral and written communication. We also brought industry professionals to campus to discuss topics such as the importance of clear communication in engineering workplaces and effective team collaboration. We hypothesize that the significant collaboration between English and Engineering faculty in developing assignments, providing feedback to students throughout their projects, and assessing students' final products, as well as the partnership with various partner industries, considerably improves our students' writing journey at TAMUQ as they learn effective and relevant professional communication skills in the field of engineering. We also discuss the steps forward to make this collaboration a model for other courses in our curriculum at our institution.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».