Using educational IT to enhance the interactive elements of scientific writing in PhD supervisiono

Author: niki.alexi@food.au.dk

Created: 2022-09-19 01:51am

Edited: 2022-09-29 12:04am

Keywords: STREAM, Scientific Writing, PhD Supervision, Feedback, Interaction, Kaizena, Padlet

Description:

Scientific writing can provide a major challenge for PhD students especially in the initial phases of the PhD journey. This can cause many delays and stress, hindering the PhD student’s progress. When it comes to scientific writing, supervision meetings and written manuscript feedback are essential tools that can help student progress and overcome obstacles faced while writing. However, each of these tools come with their own limitations in real life application.
Within these frames, integrating educational IT in scientific writing, such as Padlet for creating the manuscript draft structure and Kaizena for giving voice feedback, can increase interaction and make this process more engaging for students while respecting the supervisors time. This approach can allow for in person supervision meeting to concentrate on important subjects instead of clarifications, making the supervision and feedback process more effective. This asynchronous (Padlet, Kaizena in connection with Word text) vs. synchronous (Supervision) loops are very much aligned to the STREAM model, since the activities performed “out of class” very much define the content of the supervision meeting that is to follow.

Intended Learning Outcomes:

Increase tools available to PhD student for scientific writing
Increase interaction, flexibility and feedback during the scientific writing process
Create a more effective and efficient writing process for the PhD student
Decrease the "loneliness" experienced by PhD students during scientific writing and negative response to written feedback

	Resources		Tasks		Supports
	Out-of-Class
	Mini paper outline shared with PhD student		Fills in Mini paper outline ↓	←	No support
	During -in person- meeting
	Microsoft word Mini paper	→	Mini paper is discussed Creates draft manuscript structure ↓	←	The Mini structure of the manuscript aims and approach are discussed. A overall structure is drafted

	Out-of-Class
←	Padlet	←	The student creates the overall structure in the Padlet- ↓	←	No Support

	During online Meeting
	Padlet		The Padlet Structure is discussed and adapted during the meeting ↓	←	Supervisor Feedback on paper structure - Online interactive session

	Out-of-Class
→	Microsoft word	←	1st draft of manuscript - probably written in sections with the below process repeated (iterations) if student faces issues- ↓	←	No support
→	Kaizena	→	1st draft -Incorporation of feedback ↓	←	Supervisor asynchronous feedback recording targeting scientific issues through questions to enhance critical thinking
→	Kaizena	→	2nd draft -Incorporation of feedback ↓	←	Supervisor asynchronous voice feedback for scientific elements (if necessary) including elaboration where necessary

	During meeting
←	Microsoft word	←	Tentative option to call in-person meeting to discuss persistent issues not resolved by asynchronous feedback ↓	←	Discussion with supervisor on persistent issues and elaboration, clarifications

	Out-of-class
	Microsoft word track changes		Incorporation of feedback	←	Supervisor asynchronous editorial feedback through track changes

Additional information

For example, the manuscript structure can be integrated in Padlet allowing an easier overview of all sections and re-arrangement of content between them. Different feedback, such as editorial “advice” vs. “scientific” can be incorporated in different colors, making it easy for the student to comprehend. Moreover, a variety of different options for attachments (from audio to drawing) are available making this a very handy tools for organizing the content as well as giving interactive feedback.
Kaizena in its turn can be used in more advanced writing phases where it can be useful to give extensive feedback or explain certain questions posed by the supervisor. The option of giving asynchronous voice feedback can speed up the process while not compromising on the quality from a supervisor’s perspective. From a student’s perspective besides the more interactive or informative nature of it, providing audio comments can bring a more personal element also reducing the negative feelings students may experience when getting feedback.