Dear Cady and Tyler,

My name is Kristen Martin and I am a Biology undergraduate with a minor in Chemistry. I

am in my third semester here at Nevada State and I am originally from the Lake Tahoe area of
California. I love animals and have a cat, Yzma (like from The Emperor's New Groove) and a
puppy, Zelda, a 2 month old Pembroke Welsh Corgi. I chose biology because I would like to enter
the fascinating field of animal sciences. I am considering a career in either wildlife or endangered
species conservation and have also considered working at a zoo in endangered species breeding
programs. That being said, writing is not my passion. It isnt so much that I dislike writing in general
but more that I dislike writing about things that I don't have any particular interest in. I think that
research writing is a whole different beast and the audience is very harsh. However, I also believe
that research writing is arguably the most exciting form of writing. New discoveries, studies,
experiments, and scientific evidence is always exciting; from space discoveries to deep-ocean
dwellers it is always something new. That's what I like to read, I'm always reading about science but I
rarely read novels. It has to be an incredibly interesting book for me to pick it up and read it cover
to cover.
When it comes to my own writing I tend to struggle with forming ideas and getting them
onto the page. For the most part, if I am writing about something I am interested in the ideas come
easily and I have plenty to say in order to fill the word count requirement. Unfortunately, this is rare
and I often find myself writing about topics that I really couldn't care less about. I also have a
difficult time with history papers especially when it comes to citations. I feel like I dont have any
ideas of my own. How can I have unique ideas when I am merely regurgitating the facts and
research of others? It feels like I should cite the whole paper, there isn't much I can say that hasnt
been said already. If I talk about something I am passionate about I can go on forever and I love to
debate. Nothing is better than an academic debate and for some odd reason I love arguing with
evidence. However, outlines are impossible and I am absolutely horrible when it comes to pacing my
writing. If I sit down and bust out my entire paper, it is usually pretty decent. But if I try to write
part of it one day and work on it again another day, my flow is terrible and I tend to use the same
words multiple times. If I write it all at once, my word choice and previous paragraphs are fresh in
my mind, making it easy to create a nice flow and avoid repetition. Some of my strengths with my
writing are my academic tone, I never sound like I am having a casual conversation with the reader. I
am also good with spelling and formatting (for the most part) as well as paper flow.
We spend most of our high school career writing in MLA format, in the same type of
English class, with the same peers editing our papers. In college, each major requires a different type
of format and style. Writing in the sciences is a completely different ball game than writing in a
subject like humanities. Instead of opinion papers and responses to other literature, the focus of
writing in the sciences is to inform colleagues and the general public of discoveries and research. In
my interview with biology professor Dr. Sigel, we discussed some of the many differences in
scientific writing. "It doesn't need to be so fancy, but it does need clarity," he said, adding that
"almost all research papers are written collaboratively, you will rarely find one with a single author".
Most people think of writing as personal, essentially a piece of you on paper. This is why most
students are more likely to seek tutoring help in math than in English. Being told your answer to a
math problem is wrong is hardly disheartening. But when someone says you have a hard time
spelling, it can be upsetting. However, anyone interested in pursuing a career in science must be
open to sharing their thoughts and ideas. "You can never take it personally," Dr. Sigel told me, "if
you do, it will make the process much more difficult and stressful than it needs to be." This advice is
much easier said than done, we spend our entire school career writing papers in solitude without
much peer editing at all. After about seven years of writing papers this way, the transition to writing
with others, sharing ideas, and accepting criticism as a method of improvement instead of a personal
attack can be a real struggle.
Our higher education system in the United States seems to be lacking when it comes to
properly preparing students in the sciences to enter their career field. The concept of 'general
education' courses to complete their credit requirement is controversial. We've all heard the
standard, "Why do I need to know about anthropology if I want to study physics?" argument from
science undergraduates. Students know that writing is important, even for science, but should we
change our method? Instead of students taking English 101 and 102, perhaps a series of two Writing
in the Sciences courses would be much more beneficial. Students could work on two mock research
papers in small groups for the semester. They would bounce ideas off each other and essentially
build skills for writing in research papers. For the first course, students would work on smaller
papers and go over writing basics before diving into groups for writing a research paper. The first
course could be a pass or fail course to give students more leeway in their first collaborative efforts.
The second course would then be able to skip the basics and move into two larger, more involved
papers for the semester and introduce a letter-based grading system. These classes would also help
with grammar and spelling basics as students work one-on-one with their peers.
I believe a class that introduces writing collaboratively would improve my own personal
issues. It would combat my problems with procrastination because I would basically be forced to
write with my peers in class. It would also be a great way to work on writers block, knowing you can
always use your peers to get new ideas and a fresh perspective on a topic. When I asked Dr. Sigel
what his pet peeve is, he told me that poor grammar is the biggest issue here at NSC. This style of
course could also help improve students' spelling and grammar because they will work closely with
peers on a constant basis. However, a class that introduces collaborative writing could be an issue as
well. What about a student who changes majors? In most cases, this may not be much of an issue.
The first class could be considered equal to an English 101 course and someone who wanted to
switch to something other than a scientific field could just continue onto an English 102 course. All
students would have experience writing in other courses like required humanities courses as well.
This means that moving on to a 102 course would not necessarily be a difficult transition. It would
also be a great introduction to what to expect in a career and help students decide if this is really
something that they want to do. If a student decided that they could not stand writing with others
for research they would theoretically be able to make the decision to change their major much
earlier. This would be good for undecided students as well. If they took the beginning research class
and loved it, it may help them decide on a major. The classes could become even more degree-
specific. Imagine offering different versions of Writing in the Sciences taught by professors in
different disciplines. Biology professors would teach biology students and psychology professors
would teach psychology students. This would make the classes even more interesting for students,
inspiring passion and motivation. When it comes to funding, there are many grants available for
programs. A set of courses like these would certainly be worthy of grants, especially since NSC is a
newer school and the program is rare. With the new expansion of NSC, more classrooms will also
be available for use, meaning finding a place to teach the class would be much less of an issue. It is
also entirely possible that NSC will introduce new majors and minors, even expanding current
programs such as Chemistry to create a new Bachelor's program. With the introduction of new
science programs, Writing in the Sciences would be even more useful for students that it already is.
It would not only prepare students for a career, but other opportunities like internships and grad
school. Finally, NSC is most definitely a lesser-known school. Our attendance is expected to increase
with the new buildings, however, Writing in the Sciences could make us much more competitive
with other schools. Publicity about the new program and buildings could help to put us on the map
and educate the public about what we have to offer. A student in Las Vegas who wants to study
biology would definitely have to think twice between UNLV and NSC. We not only offer new
buildings, small class sizes, lower tuition, and free parking but we could also offer degree-specific
writing courses as well. An increase in enrollment because of a class that is paid for by grants would
present even more opportunities for NSC to advance.
After examining my own writing in addition to my interview with Dr. Sigel and student
writing examples, I believe that the introduction of Writing in the Sciences courses here at NSC
would fix many of the issues students face in writing. In my own writing, I have great difficulty with
forming ideas for my paper. It would be really nice to have peers to bounce ideas off of and edit my
writing. I also think that for many, writing and spelling are challenging. But with constant peer
influence, spelling and grammar may be greatly improved. A research based writing class would be
invaluable in the preparation of science undergraduates for future careers. It would also be a
wonderful opportunity for students to decide on a major or change their major earlier instead of
wasting time just to change their major later. I think it would also help students with confidence and
accepting criticism. It could make students more comfortable with using resources like the writing
center and writing tutors which would improve their ability to write overall. It could be a pioneer in
how science undergraduates fulfill their writing requirements. I think that the Writing Center here at
NSC could help students by advocating for a Writing in the Sciences program. They could work
closely with science professors to develop the program and work together to provide specific
tutoring for the course. Because they work constantly with student's and their writing, it would be
helpful for both students and professors. Science professors will need to adjust to teaching a writing
class and could talk with the writing center about where they think the professor should start the
curriculum. It would make it easier to determine how much time needs to be spent on things like
spelling and
grammar. With this new system, students would be able to improve their writing and tailor it
specifically to fit the needs of their career.