Academic WritingIntroductory lecture

Rita Kovordanyi (Nahid Shahmeri, Magnus Merkel, Anna Vapen)

Department of Computer and Information Science

Outline

• Course information• Research papers and academic writing in general• Summary vs. critique• The assignments for the seminars

Course work focused during HT1

• Suggestion by previous year’s students to focus course on first half of the semester• Frees up time for other courses during second half of semester

• Course contents• Writing summary and critical review• Library search• Equal opportunity

Linköpings universitet2016-09-04Sid 3

More information on the course home page

Literature

• G. D. Gopen, J. A. Swan. 1990. The Science of Scientific Writing—If the reader is to grasp what the writer means, the writer must understand what the reader needs. American Scientist, vol. 78.• Recommended (not mandatory): Swales, John M. & Feak, Christine

B. Academic Writing for Graduate Students - Essential Tasks and Skills. University of Michigan Press, 2004, ISBN:9780472088560

• Literature of your choice, as long as it does not contradict the principles brought up by the course

Work steps for the assignments

• Summary assignment• Home work (preparation)

• Read research article (linked on the course home page)

• Seminar

• Home work• Read Gopen et al: The science of scientific writing (course home page)

• Write draft of summary• Hand in to supervisor via Urkund (see course home page for instructions)

• Feedback meeting with supervisor (Rita or Oleg)• Home work

• Prepare and hand In final version of summary via Urkund

• Repeat same procedure for the review assignment

Research paper structure

• Title• Abstract• Introduction• Theory/Background• Method / Experiment / implementation• Results• Discussion• Conclusions (Future work)• Acknowledgement• References

Overview of a Research PaperIntroduction

Method / technique / implementation

Results

Discussion

General

Specific

Specific

General

EXAMPLE TEXTS

Linköpings universitet2016-09-04Sid 9

Structure/Organization (Swales and Feak, 2004, p. 12)

• All good texts have structure

DearMs.Wong,

Thankyouoryourinterestinouruniversity. Acknowledgment

OnbehalfoftheDeanoftheGraduateSchool,IcongratulateyouonbeingacceptedtotheprograminAerospaceEngineeringtobeginstudyatthemasterlevel./…/

GoodNews

AsareflectionoftheimportancetheGraduateSchoolplacesontheabilityofitsstudentstocommunicateeffectively,theGraduateSchoolrequiresallnewstudentswhosenativelanguageisnotEnglishtohavetheirEnglishevaluated.Specificdetailsforthisprocedurearegivenintheenclosedinformationpacket.

Administrativedetails

WelookforwardtowelcomingyoutoMidwesternUniversityandwishyousuccessinyouracademiccareer.

Welcomingclose

Standard strategy in academic writing: The problem-solving approach

• Description of a situation• Sets the background/context

• Identification of a problem• This will be the focus of the rest of the paper

• Description of a solution• Describe in such detail that the study is replicable by someone else

• Evaluation of the solution• Strengths and weaknesses• Unsolved questions (future research)

Example of problem-solving approach (Swales & Feak, 2004, p. 14-15)

Forover20yearsnowbiologistshavebeenalarmedthatcertainpopulationsofamphibianshavebeendeclining.Thesedeclineshaveoccurredbothinareaspopulatedbyhumansaswellasareasseeminglyundisturbedbypeople

Descriptionofsituation

However,offeringclearproofofthedecliningnumbersofamphibianshasbeendifficultbecauseinmostcasesthereisnoreliabledataonpastpopulationsizeswithwhichtocomparerecentnumbers.Moreover,itisnotentirelyclearwhetherthedeclinesareactuallypartofanaturalfluctuationinpopulationsarisingfromdroughtsorascarcityoffood.

Identificationofaproblem

Toaddressthisproblembiologistsarechangingthewaytheyobserveamphibianpopulations.Onegooddocumentationmethodinvolvescountingspeciesoverthecourseofseveralyearsandunderavarietyofclimaticconditions.

Descriptionofasolution

Thismethodshouldyieldreliabledatathatwillhelpresearchersunderstandtheextenttowhichamphibianpopulationsareindangerandbegintodeterminewhatcanbedonetostemthedeclineinpopulations.

Evaluationofasolution

Overview of a Research PaperIntroduction

Method / technique / implementation

Results

Discussion

General

Specific

Specific

General

The general-specific (GS) approach

• Often used in introductions• Often used as background in an analysis section or discussion• GS texts can start with

• Broad statement

• Contrastive or comparative definition• General fact

• Narrow in on a particular focus• The final focus must be clear to the reader: this is what the rest

of the text will be about

Example of GS text (Swales & Feak, p. 45-46)Sellingcities:promotingnewimagesformeetingtourism

Meetings tourism,whichwedefineastravelassociatedwithattendanceatcorporateorassociationmeetings,conferences,conventionsorcongressesorpublicortradeexhibitions,hasemergedasasignificantsubsectionofthetouristindustrybothintermsofvolumeoftravelandexpendituregenerated.

“Meetings”demonstrateenormousvariety,rangingfromsmallbusinessmeetingsofafewparticipantstolargeconventionsof,forexample,professionalassociationswhichmightattractinexcessof20,000delegates.

Generaldefinition

Detailsinsupport

Therangeoflocations withinwhichthesemeetingstakeplaceisalsobroad,includingsuchsitesashotels,universities,sportsvenues,andspeciallybuiltconventioncenters.

Details

Themeetingtourismmarket hasbeenvigorouslypursuedbymanyformerindustrialcitiesinEuropeandtheU.S.aspartoftheirstrategiesofpost-industrialurbanregeneration(Law,1987,p.85).

Details

Thismarket offersanumberofobviousattractionstosuchcities,notleasttherapidityofitsgrowth…

Narrower

FiguresfortheU.S.A.suggestthebusinessconferenceindustryalmostdoubled duringthe…

Narrower

Good text flow

Topic sentences• Each paragraph should contain one topic sentence around

which the rest of the paragraph is built• The topic sentence is usually the first sentence of the

paragraph

Specifying paragraph

This leads to a two level hierarchy of the descriptions. On the activity level we have the actual manipulation of the task, while – at the procedure level – we only have information about the ordering of the activities.

Exemplifying paragraph

In all interesting cases the Gauss-Seidel iteration converges at least as fast as the naive Jacobi iteration. For instance, the latter needs five iterations to converge for the rev/2-example whereas the former method converges after only two iterations.

Substantiating paragraph

The division of unification procedures into being either complete or incomplete sometimes seems too coarse. In particular this is the case when the underlying theory is underspecified, so that no sound and complete unification procedure can exist.

Modifying paragraph

The implementation of DCGs is correct with respect to the declarative semantics outlined above. However, because Prolog is used for solving literals in rules, it is not complete.

THE TWO ASSIGNMENTS

Summary

• Should focus on the most important and most relevant aspects of the original text• Condense into 400 words in your summary

• Should present the main points of the original article accurately• Presented in your own words!

When you write a summary

• Helps if you can see the previously described structures in the article you’re about to summarize• Identify important points in the paper

• Intro & aim: What was the main point or objective of the paper? • Research questions: What is the problem described? • Method: What was done to address the problem?

• Experiment?

• Implementation?

• Results & discussion: How was the solution evaluated?

• Describe these briefly in your summary, in your own words• Make sure you are not biased (= neutral tone)

Structuring

• Decide preliminary points, e.g.• Introduction

• Background• Solution/implementation (Method + Results)

• Discussion• Conclusion

• Within each section (heading)• Decide flow of the text

• Write short bullets for each piece of idea you want to write about• When you’re satisfied with flow: expand each bullet

Critical review

• Common structure of a critical review1. Short summary

• Max 30-40% of the text

2. Evaluation• At least 60-70% of the text

• Critique means critical evaluation• Both positive and negative• Well-grounded in facts / logical argumentation

Critical review

• The evaluation should be fair• Not your personal views, but reasonable, logical evaluation

• Follow the rules of the particular scientific field• Empirical research

• Are the conclusions supported by the results? • Other ways to interpret the results? • Results may be relevant for theories that have not been mentioned

• Engineering• Performance of the technique / solution presented• Costs or effort vs. benefits• Relationship to other techniques / solutions

Critical review

• Example of points to bring up• Scientific achievements

• Is the question clearly formulated?• Is the question relevant?• Is the scientific methodology appropriate?• Can the conclusions be justified?• Does the text give new knowledge?

• Presentation• Is the text well structured?• Are graphs and tables informative?

Submit through Urkund

• Urkund – tool for discovering plagiarism• Comparisons with database and the web

• Teacher is informed of similar pieces of texts• Percentage match of each piece• Link to the original text

• You will get email from Urkund, asking if you want to add your draft to the database• Answer No, otherwise you risk 90% match when you submit final

version

WRITING STUDENT REPORTS

Language

• Be consistent!• American or British English?• Passive or active voice?

• Past tense or present?

• Learn “connectives” that can make your text cohesive• Use proofing tools and other people for proofreading your text• If you feel you need help with the English:

• Academic English support at LiU (http://www.liu.se/ikk/aes?l=en)

Reports as examination

• Convince your reader that you understand the ideas and the topic you write about• Do not repeat the original text or the teachers words• Express your own understanding of the topic

• Use your own words!• Repeating the exact wording ≠ understanding

Reports as examination

• Potential problems• Collaboration when not permitted

• If report must be written individually

• Plagiarism• Copying or “borrowing” text or thoughts• Use own words and reference correctly

• Charges of cheating are brought before the Disciplinary Board at Linköping University and can result in suspension

REFERENCING

Correct referencing

• Other’s text or thoughts• Write in your own words + insert reference

• … these techniques require manual labelling (Liu, 2014; Wang, 2011)• … can be approximated as … (Carl Lowell, personal communication)

• Cite + insert reference• .. was so pointedly expressed by Lars Ericsson:

“Exact wording of Lars Ericssons original article goes here…“

(Ericsson 1978, p 23)

• Do not cite unless there is a point with showing the exact original phrasing

Paraphrasing

• When you rewrite a piece of text using your own words but retaining the general message

• Paraphrasing is plagiarism if the referencing is left out OR if the wording is too close to the original

• Make sure you keep the gist/thought/point of the original text (but not the wording of the text)!

Paraphrasing examples

• Original text (from Lu, 1997):“Descartes introduces the possibility that the world is controlled by a malicious demon who has employed all his energies to deceive him.”

• Paraphrase:Descartes suggests that the world is controlled by an evil demon who may be using his energies to deceive (Lu, 1997)

• Plagiarism: even though the citation is provided, the sentence still has pieces of exact wording (italicized)

Paraphrasing examples, cont'd

• Original text (from Lu, 1997):“Descartes introduces the possibility that the world is controlled by a malicious demon who has employed all his energies to deceive him.”

• Paraphrase:Descartes thought that the evil power who rules the world may be creating an illusory experience in the beholder (Lu, 1997).

• Comment: Not plagiarism: the paraphrased portion is fully rewritten, and a citation is provided

Correct referencing

• Your own previous texts• Reference

• … as described in our previous studies (Kovordanyi and Roy, 2011)

• Your own ideas• State clearly that these ideas are your own (if not stated clearly, the

reader will expect a reference)• E.g. In this work I suggest a new technique for …• E.g. We argue that …

Referencing

• Many different styles• APA (humanities)

• … as demonstrated by Carlson and coworkers (Carlson et al, 2010)…• Carlson, A., Betteridge, J., Kisiel, B., Settles, B., Hruschka Jr, E. R., &

Mitchell, T. M. (2010). Toward an Architecture for Never-Ending Language Learning. In AAAI (Vol. 5, p. 3). Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/aaai/aaai10/paper/download/1879/2201

• IEEE (engineering)• … as demonstrated by Carlson and coworkers [4] …• [4] A. Carlson, J. Betteridge, B. Kisiel, B. Settles, E. R. Hruschka Jr,

and T. M. Mitchell, “Toward an Architecture for Never-Ending Language Learning.,” in AAAI, 2010, vol. 5, p. 3.

Note that the title (of the journal) is italicized

When not to reference

• Your own ideas• Your own conclusions• Your own reflections• Your own analysis• Your own experience• Your own observations• etc.

• When using ”common knowledge”• The earth is round…

Reference! (other’s ideas)

• Somebody else's new concept• Somebody else's general idea• Somebody else's chain of reasoning• Somebody else's table• Somebody else's figure• etc.

• E.g.• “An interesting idea was suggested by Frank Hendersson (personal

communication, 2011) …”

Tables and figures

• All tables and figures must be cross-referenced in the text• E.g. … as can be seen in Figure 3, the average temperature…• E.g. The average temperature increased with … (Figure 3).

• Tables usually have a table heading just above the table• E.g. Table 1: The average temperature increase per year...

• Figures have a figure caption below the figure• E.g. Figure 3. A plot of the average temperature …

Acknowledgements

• Give credit where credit is due• Acknowledge people who have helped with

• Proofreading• Reviewing• Data collection• Statistical analysis• Etc.