The Mechanics of Scientific Writing
W.S. Warner, Ph.D.
Writing Assistants
Tuesday – Connor Cavanagh
Wednesday - Kayla Graham
The Writing Centre
3
rdfloor Tivoli
Open Tuesday and Wednesdays in June
Program
Day 1
Analysis –critical thinking from note taking to brainstorming
Structure –outlining: analytical, comparison & contrast, argumentative Day 2
IMRAD – standard components of a publishable research manuscript Citation – guidelines for referencing and how to avoid plagiarism
Day 3
Tables and Figures – how to make your writing understood
Precision and Punctuation – how to make your writing accurate Day 4
Clarity – six principles of clear writing Day 5
Cohesion – how to make your writing fluid Concision – how to make your writing tight
Analysis
“A kind of laziness pulls me back into my old ways… this will be hard work”
R. Descartes (1641)
Analysis
• The process of putting together an argument.
• Interprets evidence to support, test, refine a claim.
• The chief claim in an analytical paper is the thesis.
• Without solid evidence a thesis is merely opinion.
• Progressive activities built on logic.
Critical Thinking Activities
•Managing time
•Structuring thoughts
•Detailing logically
•Drafting
•Revising
•Editing
•Making connections
•Thinking contextually
• Mapping ideas
•Analyzing
•Evaluating
•Critiquing
Reading Reflection
Outlining Writing
What annoys supervisors…
and editors?
1. Failing to answer the question 2. Poor language
3. Too much description, too little critical analysis
Greasley, P. and Cassidy, A- (2010). When it Comes Round to Marking
Assignments: How to Impress and How to ‘Distress’ Lecturers. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 35: 173-189
Favorable Elements
• Analysis of reading rather than description
• Critical debate supported with appropriate literature
• Critical comment on the literature
– “Author A takes this view in contrast to author B”
– “What they both fail to account for fully is…”
– “An alternative interpretation can be offered by…”
– “Author C does not account for the problematic nature of…”
• Engaging with the topic at a deeper level
– Clearly demonstrating an ability to see different perspectives – Present these perspectives within the assignment
– Develop reasoned conclusions
Critical = Vital
• Not criticizing – respond don’t react
• Creative solutions – thinking outside the box
• Often adequate/practical solution – not ideal
• Add value – your learning, others knowledge
• Supervisors want
– To hear your ideas, based upon research
– Not reproduce their lectures and assigned reading – Not uninformed speculation
– Your stance
Where do you stand?
• Papers that convey a writer’s stance are usually strong
• Should you be in the foreground?
• Academics vary on personal pronouns: I, me, we, us, our
• Focus on the topic clearly and where you stand
We wish to suggest a structure for D.N.A. This structure has novel features which are of considerable biological interest. (Watson and Crick, 1953)
When to incorporate evidence
• Offer evidence that agrees with your stance –
up to a point.– Then add your own ideas
• Present evidence that contradicts your stance
– Then argue against (refute) that evidence – And therefore strengthen your argument
• Use sources against each other
– As if they were experts on a panel discussing your proposition
• Use quotations to support your assertion
– Not merely to state or restate your claim.
Use of Evidence
Weak
Today, terrorists are too self-centered.
Most cells no longer sit down to eat together, preferring instead to eat on the go while rushing to the next
explosion (Bush, 2008). Everything is about what they want.
• Evidence not related to the claim
• What does the claim (self-
centeredness) have to do with eating together?
• Writer does not explain connections
Strong
Today, most terrorists are too self- centered. Even membership within a terrorist organization, or even a cell, doesn’t have much influence. Evidence shows that most members of terrorist cells no longer live together, preferring instead to live solitary lives – and
spontaneously explode (Bush, 2008).
Living together enables people to
connect; however, that connection has become less valued, as terrorism
begins to prize individual glory over shared ideology, promoting self- centeredness over group identity.
How to take a stand
• Balance hard criticism with hard analysis
• Linguistic tools reveal your analysis
– Introductory verbs: seem, indicate, suggest – Thinking verbs: believe, assume, suggest – Reporting verbs: claim, find, confirm, assert – Uncertainty verbs: will, may, might, could
– Evaluative adjectives: inaccurate, misguided, limited
– Relationship words: furthermore, similarly, hence, therefore
Scholastic writing summary
• Be an active reader
• Try to think outside the box
• Avoid giving too much description
• Engage in critique as you write about your sources
• Identify your own stance as an analytical writer
Decartes Critical Thinking Method
Meditations on First Philosophy in which are demonstrated the Existence of God and the distinction between the Human Soul and the Body
(1641)
Errors of Understanding
– Doubt everything
– Examine other people’s ideas – Skepticism is useful
– Critique your own ideas – Analyze texts
Errors of Academic Writing Failing to
– talk about your ideas – revise your thoughts – edit your writing
– see beyond the surface level
Critical thinking for scientific writing
• Critical (Vital) reading
– Locating appropriate sources
– Selecting the best sources for your task – Evaluating your sources
• Critical (Vital) planning
– Understanding your task – don’t assume – Fulfilling your task within the timescale – Developing your own timescale
• Critical (Vital) writing
– Critiquing your own work
– Working with others to revise your writing – Revise, revise, revise
Where to begin?
Read
• Discuss the topic with others
• Do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority
– Remember that the author of every text has an agenda.
– Do you agree with the author?
– Does the author adequately defend her argument?
– What kind of proof does she use?
• Put away that highlighter – take notes!
– Highlighting a text is good for memorizing —it does not encourage critical reading.
– Your goal as a reader: put the author's ideas in your own words.
– Stop thinking of these ideas as facts and start thinking of them as arguments.
• Hidden agendas for effective arguments.
Critical
• Analyze
• Evaluate: previewing sources
– Skimming for topic: intro, conclusion, topic sentences – Scanning for relevance: data, statistics, facts
• To support your own writing
• Need to have a clear goal: your stance or learning a theory
• Critique: rejecting sources
– Be prepared to reject sources you find confusing – Trust your instincts if you feel source not useful – Badly presented material, not complex arguments – Persevere with well-written challenging text
Reading
Quoting Secondary Sources
• Select material that is important, not trivial
• Use quotation marks – otherwise…
• Use exact words and short passages
• Use sparingly – overuse shows:
– you did not clearly understand subject – lack evidence and therefore pad
• Signal relationship to rest of discussion
Smith (2010, p. 32) suggests that most foreign aid is based upon
“crude, abstract theory” not rigorous scientific investigation supported with tangible evidence.
Paraphrase vs. Quote
Quotation
Hein (2010) explains heredity in this way:
“Except for identical twins, each person’s heredity is unique” (p.28).
• Exact words of author
• Indicates speaker
• Surrounded by quotation marks
Paraphrase
One source explains that
heredity is special and distinct for each of us, unless a
person is one of identical twins (Hein, 2010, p. 28).
• Uses your own words
• Represents author’s view, not yours
• About same length as original passage.
When to quote?
• The writer’s words are especially vivid, memorable, or expressive.
• Expert’s explanation is so clear and concise that a paraphrase would be confusing or wordy.
• You want to emphasize the expertise or
authority of your source.
Paraphrase versus Summary
Why paraphrase?
• To demonstrate your understanding of a text
• To put into your own words without distorting the meaning
.
Bjørnsen (2009) argues that
although politicians have promised things will change, few people
criticize Norway’s National Health Service.
Why summarize?
• To demonstrate your knowledge of a wide range of sources
• To give a brief account of the
relevant points from whole texts.
Bjørnsen (2009) discusses the pressures on health workers not to speak out about poor
standards of care. He provides examples of professionals across Norway who were silenced when they raised concerns. Bjørnsen contrasts this reality with
Hansen’s (2001 ) theory that claims ‘gagging laws’ …
Use signal words
to introduce quotes and paraphrases
acknowledges adds
admits agrees argues asserts believes claims
comments concedes concludes
condemns
considers contends describes disagrees explains finds holds insists notes observes
points out predicts preposes reports says
shows
speculates
suggests
warns
writes
Critical
• Make connections
– What is your topic influenced by?
– What or how does it influence?
• Think contextually
– Explain your topic:
• What are the components?
• How is the topic like/unlike other similar topics?
– Trace events:
• What events have impacted your subject.
• How or why has it changed over time?
Reflection
But how?
Two problems
1. Too little information
– Feeling ‘blank’
– Lacking inspiration – Anxiety about a topic
2. Too much information
– Lost in the facts
– Overwhelmed by themes – Confused by relationships
Three solutions
1. Free-writing
2. Brainstorming
3. Clustering
1. Free-writing
• Start with a blank page
• Let thoughts flow without an ‘inner judge’
• Don’t worry about quality or style
• Set limit (10-15 minutes)
• Review for discoveries and insights
2. Brainstorming
• Note possible terms that emerge from the general topic
• Don't throw out what might not be a good idea.
• Group the items that make sense to you.
• Give each group a label.
– Now you have a topic with possible points of development
– Write a sentence about the label you have given the group of ideas.
– Now you have a potential topic sentence
