2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Engineering undergraduates often mention hands-on laboratory courses as the most exciting learning experience in college. At the same time, they frequently point out that lab report writing is one of the most difficult tasks. Indeed, writing requires an extensive time investment for students, from developing ideas to proofreading before submission. Although engineering educators and writing educators offer impactful instructions in academic writing, engineering undergraduates seem to struggle when they are assigned to write in their major classes. This paper aims to investigate the areas of writing competencies where students improve or struggle in lower-division engineering laboratory courses. We collected and analyzed lab report samples from sixty-four students (n = 64) in a total of seven sophomore-level civil, electrical, and mechanical engineering courses at three different universities, consisting of a polytechnic university, a liberal art-focused private university, and a branch campus of research-one land grant university in the academic years of 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. The analysis results from the lab sample assessment, using nine lab report writing outcomes, indicate that 30% or 19 out of 64 students could write their early lab reports at a satisfactory level; however, 70% or 45 out of 64 of students did not receive satisfactory grades in their early lab reports. These students are classified as the “needs improvement” group. The 45 students in the needs improvement group struggled with all nine outcomes; most notably, they had the lowest average scores in outcomes 5 (lab data interpretation), 6 (productive conclusions), and 7 (development of ideas), which often require evaluation and synthesis in Bloom’s Taxonomy. This group of students’ later lab report samples were assessed to investigate areas of change over the lab course periods. Lab instructions positively impacted students’ writing, showing marginally improved average scores in all nine outcomes. The largest improvement was observed in lab data interpretation, followed by lab data analysis and lab data presentation. Even with the improvement in their late labs, the engineering undergraduates in the needs improvement group still struggle with addressing technical audience expectations, lab data interpretation, effective conclusion writing, and idea development, even with instructions and productive feedback from the lab instructors and/or teaching assistants.