Scientific Writing course (CMB00803).
Syllabus: This course is designed for first-year graduate students and covers the fundamental principles of scientific writing, including the different components of a research paper, elements of a grant proposal, experimental protocols, posters, PowerPoint presentations, and progress reports. In addition to mastering scientific writing, students will develop the analytical abilities by analyzing and improving scientific writing of others, as well as learn the skills of navigating scientific information to master a focused writing in science. The course utilizes a variety of learning techniques, such as frequent in-class exercises, group discussions, weekly homework assignments, and oral presentations.
The Learning Objectives: By the end of the course, students will be able to: (1) Compose all sections of a research paper (i.e., a Title, an Abstract, an Introduction); (2) Convert Materials & Methods section into Protocol and vice versa; (3) Analyze, critique, and improve scientific documents written by others; (4) Practice writing of a progress report (annual requirement for graduate students); (5) Compose a Specific Aims section of a grant proposal; (4) Evaluate, organize, and orally communicate research data. The course materials are available on Canvas, including PowerPoint lectures, templates, examples, guidelines, online sites links, manuscripts, and protocols.
The philosophy behind the SW course teaching. Scientific Writing may initially seem dry and limited to specific professions, but it encompasses far more than manuscript preparation and funding applications—it equips individuals with an essential skillset applicable to any professional endeavor. These include organizing data effectively to tell a compelling story, mastering communication and persuasive techniques, handling criticism professionally, efficiently utilizing literature, enhancing attention to detail and creativity, developing a unique writing style and logical thinking, learning new software tools, practicing public speaking, summarizing complex information concisely, and minimizing redundancies in written and oral presentations.
Our goal is to impart these skills to graduate students through the Scientific Writing course.
Dr. Natalia Shcherbik's qualifications as a scientific writer and communicator: After obtaining PhD in Molecular Biology and Biochemistry in 2003, Dr. Shcherbik pursued two postdoctoral trainings before securing a faculty position at Rowan University. Currently, she holds a tenure-track Associate Professor position at Rowan-Virtua TBES, with a secondary appointment at Rowan-Virtua SOM.
Throughout her research career, Dr. Shcherbik has authored over 37 research manuscripts, including both original research papers and review articles. In 17 of these manuscripts, she served as the corresponding author. Additionally, Dr. Shcherbik has submitted over 15 grant applications to esteemed organizations such as the National Institutes of Health, American Heart Association, National Science Foundation, New Jersey Health Foundation, and the Rowan-supported Osteopathic Heritage Foundation. Six of her grant proposals have received funding. Dr. Shcherbik has actively participated in over 25 research conferences, workshops, and invited speaker seminars, where she presented data from her laboratory and engaged in discussions with fellow researchers. Furthermore, she has contributed to the scientific community by serving as a reviewer for 13 peer-reviewed scientific journals, offering valuable feedback to enhance the clarity and impact of others' research. These accomplishments highlight Dr. Shcherbik's expertise as a scientific writer and communicator, proficient in manuscript and grant writing strategies, manuscript preparation for publishing (including direct communication with editors), and effective presentation skills. Dr. Shcherbik's experience in delivering platform and poster presentations has equipped her with techniques to captivate and engage audiences, fostering professional networking opportunities.
During her career at Rowan University, Dr. Shcherbik has mentored three graduate students who successfully completed their PhD and MS degree theses under her direct guidance. Additionally, Dr. Shcherbik has served on 11 Advisory committees since 2010 and supervised 23 students’ rotations. Through these mentoring activities and regular interactions with students, Dr. Shcherbik recognized that the primary challenge students face in the classroom is to translate new knowledge into practical applications. Given this insight, when offered the opportunity to direct the SW course at Rowan's graduate school, Dr. Shcherbik made it her mission to incorporate numerous practical applications. She is dedicated to sharing her extensive knowledge and real-world experiences beyond the laboratory, preparing Rowan graduates for diverse career paths.
More precisely into the course details: This course is a 16-week program that meets once a week. The final class in Week 16 is dedicated to the presentation of the final exam. Over the course of 13 weeks, students are taught the main types of scientific writing (as listed in the syllabus) through lectures. The lectures are divided into informative sessions (3 lectures) and interactive sessions (9 lectures). Three classes are dedicated to presentations, discussions, feedback, and editing. During the interactive lectures, ~30-50% of the time is devoted to practical exercises. Additionally, every week, students are required to complete a homework assignment for the following week's class. To learn and practice scientific writing skills, students work with original research manuscripts available in PubMed. However, they are limited to manuscripts that are published by the scientists, others than the Rowan University professors, to ensure fair learning among all students. Using these published manuscripts, students are given various writing and editing assignments. These include composing the Title & Abstract of a manuscript (based on a redacted version provided), writing Figure legends and Materials & Methods sections, creating a Poster and PowerPoint presentations, writing a Progress Report using the manuscript's data as their own, and developing a Specific Aims page that outlines potential future research based on the published work. In addition, students practice their editing skills by identifying confusingly written sections in manuscripts published by other researchers. They then rewrite these sections to improve clarity and readability. Furthermore, students are required to describe their own data collected during lab rotations in the Results section. Throughout all these writing exercises, students apply the concepts they have learned during the classes.
We are consistently collecting feedback from students to evaluate the effectiveness of our teaching approaches.
Here are some reviews of the course:
Brittany Friedson, PhD student, SW-2019. “The SW course was helpful indeed. I was able to apply what we learned to my progress reports, abstract submissions, advisory papers, and qualifying exam paper. The most beneficial was reading a paper that aligns with our interest and coming up with aims to propose a project on it. It allowed us to think critically about a topic in our field, and to practice making connections from readings to form a question/ experimental plan. I also found the abstract lessons helpful to know what components there are within an abstract, as well as the type of wording that we should use. The Specific Aims assignment helped me in composing my advisory committee proposal.”
Rachael Wilson, PhD student, SW-2019. “I found this course to be very helpful. The following assignments were most beneficial to me: writing an abstract/title, figure legends, the progress report, and the specific aims. The Specific Aims assignment was the most difficult assignment for me but also had the most impact. I used the framework and guidelines from this class to write a specific aims page for my thesis proposal and for a grant application.”
Stephen Dylan Willis, PhD student, SW-2020. “The course was very helpful for me personally as I was getting ready to prepare a manuscript during it. The most beneficial is the results and the grant writing as they were applicable right away and really help to get in the mode of writing with a scientific mindset. Regarding the Specific Aims assignment: it was very helpful and of perfectly acceptable difficulty for a person studying in the life sciences hoping to obtain a PhD.”
Steven Doyle, DO-PhD student SW-2020. “The SW course was helpful. I personally think all of the assignments were beneficial. They served as practice for useful skills such as generating figure legends, writing materials and methods, and other portions of grant/journal submissions.”
Tamaraty Robinson, PhD student, SW-2023. “I think the course was very well run and has been very useful when preparing written documents during the PhD program. I have utilized the skills learned in this course to prepare for committee meetings, prepare abstracts and posters for conferences, etc. The course has also been invaluable to preparing for various types of oral presentations. I especially enjoyed being able to present in front of the class and instructors provide critiques on our writing skills. This has not only provided practice with various types of scientific writing, but it also provided valuable skills such as navigating questions, presentation preparation, and critical analysis of scientific articles. Filtering out unnecessary information was very challenging for me to do when we first started the course, but I was able to improve on this skill over time. In addition, I frequently refer to both the materials that we were provided and the exercises that we participated in whenever I have to prepare a scientific document.
In terms of the course, I think everything was very well prepared and explained. I think that the interactive assignments were the most beneficial, and I liked the smaller groups that we were able to break into for feedback. The presentations were clear, but I think some of the slides were very busy visually. For example, the color coding was very useful but the backgrounds that have a lot of words on them were very distracting.
As an instructor and course director, I think Dr. Shcherbik has done an excellent job at helping students, including myself, improve their scientific writing skills. I think she has provided a great deal of feedback on our work, in a timely manner to prepare us for our future careers as professional scientists. Specifically, I liked when we prepared writing samples, and we were provided detailed feedback to the mistakes that we have made so that we can adjust it accordingly. I also appreciate that Dr. Shcherbik is open to suggestions, and actively seek out our input on how to improve the course. Overall, the scientific writing course, and you have been a great help in developing skills needed to enter the workforce.”
Liya Popova, PhD student, SW-2023: “This course helped me to prepare for the thesis advisory committee meeting on specific aims and the qualifying exam. My progress reports writing is now based on the information obtained from the course. Overall, for me, this is one of the most valuable courses on the program”.
Jill Thompson, PhD student, SW-2023: “The scientific writing class was helpful, particularly the specific aims assignment. Dr. Shcherbik guided us to improve our proposals on our own, and assignments were graded quickly with constructive feedback. The class was interactive and engaging, both in assignments and in-class activities. Overall, it was a valuable experience that improved my writing skills and prepared me for future grant writing”.
Eleni Papadopoulos, DO-PhD student, SW-2023: “I took a Scientific Writing course with Dr. Shcherbik who was an instructor and course director. This course was pivotal for my career as a dual degree student who needed improvement on their writing skills. I found the writing assignments challenging as they pushed me to think about my writing in a more cohesive way. Specifically, there was an assignment where we had to write a specific aims page with tools given to us during the lecture. This was the first time in my career where I had to write one, and it prepared me for my thesis proposal. Grading for assignments were returned in a timely fashion with constructive feedback. Additionally, Dr. Shcherbik held an end of the course event where we provided open and honest feedback about the course, as this information is used to make improvements to the following year. Dr. Shcherbik was open to suggestions on student-originated improvements, which reflects how deeply she cares about our education. Dr. Shcherbik goes the extra mile to listen to the graduate students and finds resources that we need to improve as students to become successful scientists."