About the case: We suggest using Aristotle's rhetorical triangle, a tool for analyzing communication in terms of logos (logic), pathos (values), and ethos (identity), in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate classes. We investigate how the triangle can enhance students’ communication skills by developing awareness of pathos and ethos, and shed light on values, considerations, and professional identity at different stages of their studies. Situating the case: Developing communication skills among STEM students is imperative even in the age of AI-based tools. Although many books and platforms exist to help facilitate communication in general, STEM students require practical tools to foster the rhetorical skills needed for effective and persuasive communication. Methods: The rhetorical triangle intervention was implemented in two undergraduate courses to help students develop the other necessary elements of effective communication beyond logos: i.e., pathos and ethos. Results: Our results show that the intervention enhanced students’ ability to express shared values (pathos) with their audience and fostered the development of professional identity (ethos). Our findings also revealed notable differences in professional identity expression when comparing two different samples of future scientists and engineers in their freshmen and senior years. Conclusion: We suggest that incorporating the elements of the rhetorical triangle into STEM education can enhance students’ communication skills, particularly in expressing the value of their work and developing a strong professional identity. We recommend integrating these elements throughout various stages of the curriculum to deepen students’ understanding of effective communication and persuasion.

The ability to carefully craft writing for an intended audience is crucial in creating persuasive rhetorical arguments. Learning to do so requires knowledge beyond IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion). Many graduate students learn by mimicking this structure, yet lack audience awareness and overuse jargon, producing low-readability texts. What is more, they increasingly rely on AI-based writing tools that mimic the same structures that are already often poorly written. The results are too often uncommunicative articles that fail to persuade the intended audience. Therefore, we suggest writing pedagogy includes a deeper understanding of effective written science communication using the rhetorical triangle. As graduate students most readily understand the importance of logos, i.e., the scientific content, our job as writing instructors should be to emphasize the role a carefully aimed pathos and ethos plays in producing highly readable, persuasive, publishable articles. To this end, this paper first presents a brief background on the IMRaD structure before outlining the much-overlooked role of the rhetorical triangle in scientific writing. Specifically, we offer a detailed table for graduate students to use in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).