Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Academic Writing: Resources and Tips
Johan Braeken
Forskergruppen LEA: Large-scale Educational Assessment Faculty of Educational Sciences, UiO, Oslo, Norway
Essential Reading
Bem, D. (2002). Writing the empirical journal article. In J.M. Darley, M.P. Zanna, & H.L. Roediger (Eds.), The Compleat Academic: A Career Guide. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. [Retrieved updated version from http://dbem.ws/WritingArticle.pdf ]
Roediger, H.L. III (2007). Twelve tips for authors. The Observer. The Association for Psychological Science (APS). [Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2007/june-july-07/twelve-tips-for-authors.html ]
Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2009). Teaching graduate students how to write clearly. The Observer. The Association for Psychological Science (APS). [Retrieved from www.ejwagenmakers.com/2009/TeachingTipsWriting.pdf ]
Background resources
Plagiarism, Quotation, Paraphrasing, Common knowledge: http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/plagiarism.shtml
Overview of different reference style systems: http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/teacher-resources/style-guide-resources-mla-apa-cse-chicago/ Courses on reference managers at UiO
http://www.ub.uio.no/english/courses/other/zotero-course/index.html http://www.ub.uio.no/english/courses/other/hf-sv-uv-endnote/index.html http://www.ub.uio.no/english/writing-referencing/
Logic in argumentative writing https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/659/1/
Hit Parade Of Errors In Grammar, Punctuation, And Style http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/style-and-editing/hit-parade-of-errors
Overcoming misconceptions: Common difficulties and Misunderstandings http://www.cirtl.net/node/2629
3
Comments on Roedigers 12 tips
A research paper is not a novel: Do not slowly build up towards your final punch line. In contrast, the relevance and contribution of your
research study needs to be clear from the start. Problem statement Principle underlying solution to problem Research questions
Build up your core message as an argument Focus on logic, clarity, and credibility Substantiate claims! Provide an easily remembered take-home message
4
1. “tell a good story” “Make a solid and interesting argument”
Comments on Roedigers 12 tips
Write clearly, with insight and occasional wit, and stick to the point.
Do not write to impress, but put concern for the readers first.
Simple language does not mean it is unscientific.
Complex language more likely implies a problem with clarity and understanding, for the readers as well as on account of the writer.
5
6. “Short is better (in general)”
Comments on Roedigers 12 tips
Avoid writing boring uninterpreted raw results sections
Give meaning to abstract numbers, do not wait until the discussion section for that. Keep the discussion for the “big stuff” and implications and nuances.
Do not just drop figures and tables in text without further reference. Refer explicitly to them in the text
Explain relevance of presented information
Explain how to read, especially if non-standard
Summarize key point it conveys.
6
7. “Don’t paralyze the reader with your results sections”
Comments on Roedigers 12 tips
Read a lot and while reading through literature Keep a file to gather "great sentences" (with citation)
Keep a file to copy-paste useful quotes (with citation)
Identify target-journals and potential reviewers during literature review Get accustomed with journal style and constraints (e.g., word limit)
Avoid reading too many research reports Tend to be slightly more sloppy due to less strict review process
Ask more experienced researchers in your field about what to read and quality/reputation of journals/research groups (do get diverse input to avoid personal bias)
7
10. “Find appropriate models”
1. Avoid alliteration. Always.
2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
3. Avoid clichés like the plague. They're old hat.
4. Comparisons are as bad as clichés.
5. Be more or less specific.
6. One should never generalize.
7) Be consistent!
8. Don't be redundant nor use more words than necessary.
9. Who needs rhetorical questions?
10. Exaggeration is a billon times worse than understatement.
11. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
12. Sentence fragments? Eliminate.
13. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
14. Avoid boring lists in the core of your text.
15. Rules are there to be broken.
Pro-Advice from the web
8
Practical Advice
Learn how to use a reference and citation manager! Time saver + consistency
Outline Free write Optimize
FRESH Break PROOF READ Send through 1st DRAFT
Feedback Rewrite & Revise CYCLIC PROCESS Avoid using Track changes in work on early draft versions
It encourages bad writing by inducing patchwork Creative rewrite > trying to badly fix what is seriously broken!
Method is surprisingly easiest section to write! settle early Introduction: Drastically rewrite introduction after settling
discussion section introduction needs to clearly set the scene for research and connect to the discussion and conclusion!
Submit to a good international journal first do not fear rejection
9
Discussion
Statler & Waldorf Writing Group ?
1. Select target paper
2. Write a short critique analyzing the article’s clarity, organization, purpose, research methodology, findings, recommendations, scope and credibility.
3. Peer review of other person’s critique
4. Group discussion of all critiques
5. Write renewed critique
6. Peer review & group discussion
7. Write final joined critique
8. Put it on LEA-website research blog
11
12
Har
ris,
M. J
. (2
00
6).
Th
ree
step
s to
tea
chin
g ab
stra
ct a
nd
cr
itiq
ue
wri
tin
g. In
tern
ati
on
al J
ou
rna
l of
Tea
chin
g a
nd
Le
arn
ing
in H
igh
er E
du
cati
on
, 17
(2),
13
6-1
46
.
