Scientific Writing Skills and Research Learning in Science and Technology: Experiences in Secondary Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71068/xkhgkk61Keywords:
scientific writing, secondary education, research learning, academic language, academic writingAbstract
Persistent weaknesses in scientific writing skills among secondary education students—particularly in clarity, coherence, formal organization, and academic language—constitute a barrier to consolidating scientific literacy and research competences. This study aimed to analyze the impact of such skills on learning in Science and Technology research at the secondary level. A mixed-methods design was applied: a descriptive–correlational quantitative approach, including a Likert-scale survey with 109 students, classroom observations, and a knowledge test; and a qualitative approach, involving thematic analysis of perceptions and rubric-based review of written products. Results indicate that most students performed at “low satisfactory” levels in clarity and coherence (57.8%) and in formal structure (51.4%), while critical levels prevailed in academic language use (62.4%). Comparative analysis reported moderate averages in scientific writing (M=7.16; SD=2.17) and research learning (M=7.01; SD=2.03), with a strong positive correlation between both variables (r=0.86). It is concluded that scientific writing functions as both a cognitive and communicative tool, making it essential to strengthen these skills through explicit instruction, scaffolding, formative assessment, and authentic tasks to enhance research performance in secondary education.
References
Anggraeni, C., Mujiyanto, J., Rustipa, K., & Widhiyanto. (2025). Effects of utilizing self-regulated learning-based instruction on EFL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed-method investigation. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 10(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-024-00317-6
Aráuz, M. (2025). La evolución del ciclo del aprendizaje. Una visión desde la teoría del todo. Estudios y Perspectivas Revista Científica y Académica, 5(1), 3407–3430. https://doi.org/10.61384/r.c.a..v5i1.1062
Barrios, I. (2023). Inteligencia artificial y redacción científica: Aspectos éticos en el uso de las nuevas tecnologías. Medicina Clínica y Social, 7(2), 46–47. https://doi.org/10.52379/mcs.v7i2.278
Blankendaal-Tran, K., Meulenbroeks, R., & van Joolingen, W. (2025). Digital research skills: Application in secondary science reports. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10259-9
Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., & Martín, E. (2023). Learning science through argumentative synthesis writing and deliberative dialogues: A comprehensive and effective methodology in secondary education. Reading and Writing, 36(4), 965–996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10191-0
Gascón, J., & Nicolás, P. (2021). Incidencia de los paradigmas didácticos sobre la investigación didáctica y la práctica docente. Educación Matemática, 33(1), 7–40. https://doi.org/10.24844/em3301.01
Giler-Medina, P. (2023). Animación a la lectura en el proceso de enseñanza–aprendizaje en Lengua y Literatura. Revista Social Fronteriza, 3(6), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.59814/resofro.2023.3(6)85-95
Giler-Medina, P., Zambrano-Andrade, E., & Pantusín-Moreira, P. (2023). Narrativas pedagógicas de la lección y aprendizaje de la expresión oral y escrita en estudiantes de bachillerato. Reincisol, 2(4), 203–221. https://doi.org/10.59282/reincisol.V2(4)203-221
Kim, S. L., & Kim, D. (2024). Empowering diverse learners: Integrating writing-to-learn strategies in a middle school science classroom in the U.S. Education Sciences, 14(9), 1031. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091031
Landrieu, Y., De Smedt, F., Van Keer, H., & De Wever, B. (2023). Argumentation in collaboration: The impact of explicit instruction and collaborative writing on secondary school students’ argumentative writing. Reading and Writing, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10439-x
Lin, Y.-R., Fan, B., & Xie, K. (2020). The influence of a web-based learning environment on low achievers’ science argumentation. Computers & Education, 151, 103860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103860
Maqueda, J., Gamo, M., Cortés, R., & Veiga-Cabo, J. (2013). Estructura y contenidos de la comunicación y redacción de artículos científicos. Medicina y Seguridad del Trabajo, 59(230), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.4321/S0465-546X2013000100011
Meneses, A., Montenegro, M., Acevedo, D., Figueroa, J., & Hugo, E. (2023). Cross-disciplinary language changes in 4th graders as a predictor of the quality of written scientific explanation. Journal of Writing Research, 15(1), 105–132. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.01.05
Morris, C., Deehan, J., & MacDonald, A. (2024). Written argumentation research in English and science: A scoping review. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2356983. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2356983
Rhodes, M. J., Gijsel, M. A. R., van Keulen, H., & Visscher, A. J. (2025). The potential functions of reading and writing activities within scientific inquiry in primary education. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 7(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-025-00128-w
Roca, D., Sánchez-Hernández, J., & Nicolás, J. (2020). Estrategias innovadoras de divulgación de la cultura científica en Educación Primaria, Secundaria y Bachillerato: Descripción del proyecto Masterchem y análisis de resultados. Revista Prisma Social, 31, 239–263. https://revistaprismasocial.es/article/view/3939
Sedlacek, Q., & Lomelí, K. (2024). Towards authentic purposes for student science writing using culturally relevant pedagogy. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 19(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-023-10203-1
Steiss, J., Wang, J., Kim, Y.-S., & Booth, C. (2024). U.S. secondary students’ source-based argument writing in history. Written Communication, 41(4), 693–725. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883241263549
van Dijk, A., van Gelderen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2022). Which types of instruction in writing-to-learn lead to insight and topic knowledge in different disciplines? A review of empirical studies. Review of Education, 10(2), e3359. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3359
Van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2023). VOSviewer (Versión 1.6.19) [Software]. Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University. https://www.vosviewer.com
Vasset, F., Dahl, B., Thunem, G., & Frilund, M. (2024). Exploring scientific writing as part of a learning model for interprofessional higher health education – A qualitative study. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100759
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Patricio Giler Medina, Jimmy David Cedeño Ostaiza, Elvira Vanessa Cevallos Lucas, Ana Priscila Cedeño López (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
