Ortigues-Marty, I. (author), Louveau, I. (author), Bee, G. (author), Oltjen, J.W. (author), Kononoff, P.J. (author), McArt, J.A.A. (author), Thomas, C. (author), Fairchild, B.D. (author), Kogut, M. (author), and Huff-Lonergan, E. (author)
Format:
Journal Article
Publication Date:
2025-03-03
Published:
USA: Oxford University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 209 Document Number: D13551
3 pages, Scientific publishing has undergone a tremendous change in recent years. We, a group of Editors-in-Chief of scientific journals owned by scientific bodies, want to communicate some of our values. We represent animal, animal – open science, animal – science proceedings, JDS Communications, Journal of Animal Science, Journal of Applied Poultry Research, Journal of Dairy Science, Poultry Science and Translational Animal Science. Our values motivate our involvement in society-, association-or scientific institution-owned journals in animal science and shape our practices in scientific publishing, in the light of the tremendous changes in the land-scape of scientific publishing over the last decade.
19 pages, This paper describes a multimodal brochure assignment in an undergraduate animal science subject with a mixed cohort of animal science and veterinary science students. The assignment involved group work and peer feedback that allowed students to improve their brochures prior to submission. Support for the communication aspects of the assignment was developed by a teaching team consisting of the subject lecturer and two lecturers with a specialisation in academic language and learning. This support consisted of a rubric containing detailed communication rows, and annotated brochures illustrating written and visual features of this unfamiliar assignment genre. At the end of the subject, students were surveyed to seek their feedback on the usefulness of the assignment, the rubric (especially the detailed communication rows), the annotated brochures, and the peer review process. Results were highly positive, with students seeing value in this type of assignment for developing their communication skills. Students reported benefits in both giving and receiving (and using) peer feedback to improve their brochures. While giving feedback was considered to be helpful for enhancing both communication and understanding of the rubric, receiving feedback was mostly seen as beneficial for the purposes of editing and proofreading. Students reported that the main challenges of the assignment were in being concise and tailoring the language of the brochure to the target audience. The results suggest that while the support was viewed as very helpful, students may need more explicit and scaffolded guidance in tailoring their communication for a non-academic audience in a multimodal genre.
