Enhancing scientific communication skills through Elevator Pitch instruction in ESP classes at technical universities

Importance. In the context of increasing interdisciplinarity and the globalization of science, a critical skill for modern researchers is the ability to communicate effectively with diverse audiences. In this regard, the Elevator Pitch genre holds particular significance. As a concise and compelling presentation format, it enables researchers to capture attention for their work, establish professional connections, and secure funding for their projects. Integrating the teaching of this genre into ESP courses for students at technical universities can foster the development of scientific communication skills. Such training not only enhances their ability to articulate research ideas but also prepares them for active participation in the global professional arena. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the impact of Elevator Pitch training on the scientific communication skills development among students of technical universities in foreign language classes.

Materials and Methods. The study employed experimental learning methods and conducted statistical data analysis using the Student’s t-test. The experiment was integrated into the English for Research Purposes course at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT). The study involved 3rdyear bachelor’s students (N = 132) in all areas of training. The experimental group was exposed to targeted tasks designed to develop Elevator Pitch skills, while the control group followed the standard curriculum. At the control stage, the effectiveness of the experimental and control groups was compared in conditions replicating professionally-oriented situations (role-playing games “Job Interview” and “Sell Your Research”), which are characterized by the use of the self-presentation genre. The effectiveness of self-presentation was assessed based on the following criteria: a) structure of the presentation; b) adaptation of speech to a specific audience; c) stylistic design of speech; d) timing. The assessment was conducted using a combination of instructor and peer assessments.

Results and Discussion. Compared with the students of the control group, the students of the experimental group showed a statistically significant increase in skills (p ≤ 0.05) according to criteria such as presentation structure, speech adaptation to the audience, speech stylistic design and timing. Peer assessment in role-playing games demonstrated audience preference for students who learned Elevator Pitch in the experimental group (61 % preference for the EG in the Job Interview game and 64 % preference for the EG in the Sell Your Research game). These results underscore the effectiveness of the Elevator Pitch training in enhancing students’ ability to communicate complex scientific ideas clearly and persuasively.

Conclusion. Students in the experimental group demonstrated significant improvement in key areas of scientific communication skills, including self-presentation and the ability to effectively present research in simulated real-world scenarios. Elevator Pitch training is a highly effective pedagogical tool for fostering scientific communication skills among students in technical universities. Incorporating Elevator Pitch preparation tasks into foreign language curricula not only enhances students' ability to engage in professional communication but also facilitates the establishment of academic and professional networks.

1. Appleby Y., Hillier Y. (2012). Exploring practice–research networks for critical professional learning. Studies in Continuing Education, vol. 34, issue 1, pp. 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037x.2011.613374

2. Barrie S.C. (2012). A research‐based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 31, issue 1, pp. 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.642842

3. Blickle G., Witzki A.H., Schneider P.B. (2009). Mentoring support and power: a three-year predictive field study on protege networking and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 74, issue 2, pp. 181-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.12.008

4. Mahmud M. (2014). Communication aptitude and academic success. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 134, pp. 125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.230

5. . Wolff H.G., Moser K. (2009). Effects of networking on career success: a longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 94 (1), pp. 196-206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013350

6. Shah A., Fatima Z., Naseer S. (2020). University students’ communication skills as a determinant of academic achievement. Journal of Education & Social Research, vol. 3 (2), pp. 107-114. http://doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss2-2020(107-114)

7. Forret M.L., Dougherty T.W. (2004). Networking behaviors and career outcomes: differences for men and women?. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 25 (3), pp. 419-437. http://doi.org/10.1002/job.253

8. Brass D.J. (2019). Social Networks at Work. New York, Routledge, 392 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203701942

9. Santos M.D. (2024). Impact of communication skills on academic productivity among civil engineering students at a Philippine University: a qualitative analysis. Asia-Africa Journal of Recent Scientific Research, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12802349

10. O’Leary C. (2008). Elevator Pitch Essentials: How to Get Your Point Across in Two Minutes or Less. New York, Limb Press LLC, 100 p.

11. Shmeleva T.V. (1997). The speech genre model. Zhanry rechi = Speech Genres, no. 1, pp. 88-98. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/vlxzcj

12. Getty P.M. (2014). The Elevator Pitch. The 12 Magic Slides. Berkeley, Apress, pp. 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-6485-9_5

13. Anisimova T.V. (2000). Tipologiya zhanrov delovoi rechi (ritoricheskii aspekt). Dr. Sci. (Philology) diss. Krasnodar, 417 p. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/qdglxp

14. De Santiago-Guervós J. (2019). Rhetorical analysis of a discourse model in the business world: Elevator Pitch. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, vol. 80, pp. 7-16. https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.66597

15. Wagner S. (2024). The First Elevator Pitch in History. Science Pitch. Wiesbaden, Springer VS, pp. 9-11. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44844-8_3

16. Kenney M. (2011). How venture capital became a component of the US National System of Innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1677-1723. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtr061

17. Caromile L.A., Jha A., Gardiner J., Dilek O., Ohi R., Ligon L. (2023). How to construct and deliver an Elevator Pitch: a recipe for the research scientist. BMC Proceedings, vol. 1, art. 27. ttp://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202312.1013.v1

18. Kabanova N.V. (2023). Simulation as a means of raising els motivation at a technical university. Materialy 10 Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii «Mnogourovnevaya yazykovaya podgotovka v usloviyakh polikul’turnogo obshchestva» = Proceedings of 10th International Scientific and Practical Conference “Multilevel Language Training in a Multicultural Society”. Kazan, pp. 44-50. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/yxcobc

19. Kabanova N.V., Kravchenko A.N. (2022). Comparative analysis of peer-to-peer and teacher assessment in English language teaching at a non-linguistic university (level B1). Materialy 3 Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoprakticheskoi konferentsii «Dialog kul’tur. Kul’tura dialoga: tsifrovye kommunikatsii» = Proceedings of the 3rd International Scientific and Practical Conference “Dialogue of cultures. Culture of dialogue: digital communications”. Moscow, Yazyki narodov mira Publ., pp. 135-140. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ddpmqp

20. Sirinterlikci A., Al-Jaroodi J., Moretti A. (2023). Integrating soft skills into technical curriculum. International Journal of Linguistics Literature & Translation, vol. 6 (11), pp. 120-130. http://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2023.6.11.16

21. Tailab M., Marsh N.Y. (2020). Use of self-assessment of video recording to raise students’ awareness of development of their oral presentation skills. Higher Education Studies, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 16-28. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3499175