Academic Writing in the Health Professions: A Comparison of Two Writing-Intensive Course Models Within a CrossDisciplinary Course

Academic writing in higher education has been a long-standing priority, with a greater need for writing supports noted in the past decades (Wingate & Tribble, 2012) and an increasing focus on discipline-specific language in order for students to learn to write and communicate effectively as professionals in their chosen fields (Grzyb et al., 2018). This study examined student learning outcomesin two writingintensive designated health professions courses (Nursing and Public Health). Students completed assignments throughout the semester. One course section required students to turn in a final paper without receiving feedback during the writing process while, in the other course, students received feedback on sections of the final paper throughout the semester. At the final exam stage, students were asked to reflect on their learning experience in the course. At the end of the semester, students submitted their final paper and completed a learning reflection to meet the course requirements. To inform a course revision, student paper and learning reflection narratives were analyzed. Narratives were de-identified and inductively coded by a single coder. First-round coding employed descriptive and in vivo coding to explore the data. The codebook for second-round coding was refined and codes were classified within the headings descriptive, emotion, and value. Findings indicate that students felt they had increased capacity for reflection when feedback was provided throughout the semester. They also felt they benefited from integrating feedback on the credibility of sources, organization, and citations. Integrating feedback and reflection opportunities contributed to greater student learning