Critical review of instructional approaches to graduate-level research writing in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

For graduate students in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), research writing is an essential skill, yet many struggle to produce work of sufficient quality. This critical review examines the instructional approaches to graduate research-writing for STEM majors, as outlined in published journal manuscripts. A total of 29 articles were analysed using a framework that evaluates two key instructional aspects: hours of instructional time and discipline-specificity of the writing instruction. The findings reveal an important contradiction in the way that universities approach graduate research writing instruction in STEM fields: although university administrators and faculty members identify research-writing as a vital but lacking skill among their graduate students, relatively few instructional hours are devoted to this topic, and what instruction is provided is general, rather than specifically tailored to students' respective discipline. We argue that enhancing research writing instruction is vital not only for improving publication outcomes but also for fostering long-term professional development. By integrating online learning materials and recognising the importance of informal learning experiences, universities can create a more effective and comprehensive writing instruction framework. This research underscores the urgent need for institutions to prioritise dedicated, discipline-specific writing courses to better prepare STEM graduate students for the demands of their fields. Context and implications Rationale for this study Research-writing is a vital but lacking skill for STEM graduate students, so this review seeks to critically examine instructional approaches. Why the new findings matter An important contradiction emerged: while universities acknowledge the essential role of research-writing for STEM students, they allocate few hours and provide generic, rather than discipline-specific, instruction. Implications This review highlights key implications for educators and curriculum designers in STEM. Educators should increase instructional hours for research-writing to at least 40 in semester-long courses. Curriculum designers are encouraged to create discipline-specific writing courses tailored to STEM graduate students' needs. Incorporating technology-enhanced learning (TEL) can enhance access to tailored resources for writing instruction. Policy-makers should advocate for resources to support these initiatives, recognising the importance of effective research-writing instruction in preparing students for the demands of their fields. Copyright © 2025 The Author(s).