Surprised by Pedagogy!

Stevens, Carol J., et al. "Implementing a Writing Course in an Online RN-BSN Program." Nurse Educator 39.1 (2014):17-21. Web. 31 May 2014.

The article discusses the writing pedagogy issues faced by the nursing faculty of Arizona State University (ASU) as their program shifted from a traditional model at its inception in 1999 to a 100% online program by 2011. Drawing on research about the need for writing in nursing, the authors make a case for collaboration between campus departments to create effective classes that integrate an outcomes-based model with a WID approach (18-19). The authors observe that “few online RN-BSN programs integrate writing instruction into their curricula,” despite professional practice documents calling for “clear and effective communication” as a competency, and a discipline-wide understanding that writing and critical thinking skills are key in a health-care environment (17).  

As ASU migrated their traditional RN-BSN program to be fully online, they took the opportunity to use the increased necessity for writing in an online environment (both for instructors and students) to re-evaluate the program.  Previous attempts to improve writing via rubrics and feedback on completed assignments were deemed unsuccessful (18).  Collaborating with their technical communication (TC) faculty, they instead integrated scaffolded, workplace-based assignments (for example, a researched proposal to a supervisor for a patient information resource) requiring a variety of audiences and forms of evidence.  The TC members drew on the WPA Outcomes for first year composition as they developed the course. Outcomes were consciously “mapped to the nursing writing course…to articulate how the course met disciplinary outcomes for writing (genre, rhetorical concepts, disciplinary conventions, and critical thinking)” (18). 

Scaffolded tasks were handled via sequenced steps on discussion boards.  Students analyzed audiences and contexts more effectively as well as critically thinking about their research process and findings (19).  The discussion “facilitate[d] engagement with the planning stage of the writing process,” and allowed feedback to come earlier in the process (20).  Stevens et al argue that the goal of “students understanding how writing and communication contribute to professionalism was met (20). While the three-year assessment was primarily based on anecdotal evidence, a formal longitudinal assessment is under development at ASU.

While I’ve found many separate articles about online writing, distance learning for nurses, and WID nursing issues, articles that combine the three are less readily found.  The recent date of “Implementing a Writing Course in an Online RN-BSN Program” suggests this is a gap in the scholarship. While the ASU course design pulls heavily and admirably on writing pedagogy, it is offered in multi-sections with a full-time TC faculty member as course-leader and sections taught by part-time “faculty associates” all working from the same “shell” (20). Further, the class enrollments are higher (capped at 30) than those recommended by OWI principles. Nonetheless, the article offers a clear overview of a WID class in an OL environment. Further it models collaboration between faculty from different disciplines who found commonality between their disciplines’ values, and were pleasantly surprised to find they had unexpectedly achieved the “development of RN-BSN faculty writing pedagogy” (20).