Scientific writing development: Improve DNP student skill and writing efficiency

BACKGROUND

Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) students lack sufficient opportunities to practice writing. Students and faculty require clear expectations and consistent feedback to improve skills.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated a rubric-driven scientific writing development program.

DESIGN

A mixed methods design was used.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a post-Master's DNP Program.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample included DNP students and faculty.

METHODS

The intervention was delivered to 10 students and writing proficiency was assessed over five semesters. Overall doctoral project quality and rigor were assessed at the end of the program and compared to a similar group of students (n = 20). Seven faculty and eight students participated in qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Performance improved from Semesters 1 to 5; and though quality and rigor did not differ, the intervention group's final papers were more efficiently written with approximately 17 fewer pages and an average review time of eight fewer minutes than the comparison group. Participants identified the rubric, feedback, and scaffolding as helpful program components.

CONCLUSIONS

Scientific writing development is essential to DNP education. The intervention improved skill performance and writing efficiency.

The Evolution of a Writing Program

BACKGROUND

Scholarly writing is required in nursing, and some students are unable to communicate effectively through writing. Faculty members may struggle with the grading of written assignments. A writing team, consisting of a nursing faculty member, the school of nursing library liaison, and members from academic support services, implemented strategies including workshops, handouts, and use of exemplars to improve student writing and to provide support to faculty. Few students sought help from the writing team.

METHOD

An online writing center within the existing learning management system was developed to address nursing students' and faculty's scholarly writing needs. The writing center includes guides, tutorials, and exemplars.

RESULTS

Anecdotal evidence indicates the use of the writing center during afternoons and evenings and prior to due dates of written assignments.

CONCLUSION

Online writing resources were used more frequently than face-to-face support. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. [J Nurs Educ. 2017;56(7):443-445.].