Vigorous writing is concise A sentence should contain

“Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. “ From : William Strunk ‘s (1918) The Elements of Style.

The Dalhousie Writing Centre Computer science

Outline Dalhousie help and resources you can use. Getting started. Proposal writing Good writing practices/science writing tips. Revision References

The Dalhousie Writing Centre http: //writingcentre. dal. ca/ Visit us online, or in person: Room G 40 C Killam Library Learning Commons 6225 University Avenue My contact information: Janice. Eddington@dal. ca

Other recommended resources: Library Subject librarian Gwendolyn Mc. Nairn Ref works Online Writing Style guides Online assignment calculator www. library. dal. ca/assignment/calcul ator/ Academic Integrity at Dalhousie http: //academicintegrity. dal. ca/ Online Writing Lab (OWL at Purdue) A great online resource (grammar, structure, etc. ): http: //owl. english. purdue. edu/

Please also see the Writing Centre Lib. Guide http: //dal. ca. libguides. com/content. php? pid=174958&hs=a Australia’s University of Adelaide Writing Centre for a webinar on intellectual property (and other materials) http: //www. adelaide. edu. au/clpd/online/learningmodules/avoiding. Plagia rism/player. html

The writing. . .

Writing as a process… a recursive process Planning, thinking, researching (reading, note taking) Outlining (going back) Writing in stages (especially for longer papers) Getting feedback Rewriting/revision Researching, rewriting Rewriting Finishing – final check & submitting

Before you start… some things to consider Developing good organizational and writing skills Know your assignment guidelines (read, re-read, ask) Create good notes (at all stages) Research/incorporate responsibly. Remember what is yours Give yourself time –be prepared to revisit and revise the plan as you go.

When you begin the process Know your audience, purpose, content, context (who, why, what, how/when)

Recall that reading is part of the ongoing process… Read (and notice) good writing --for style, and for content • clarity (how did they achieve it? ) • organization/structure/flow • tone (discipline-specific ‘rules’)

As you read, read actively… Annotate the text with thoughts, questions, ideas… Ask yourself: What is the author’s thesis? Have they supported their arguments? If so, how did they do so? What have they left out? Have they thought of…?

As you research Limit your topic – continue to develop a strong thesis Use acceptable evidence Keep the reader in mind (tell them what you are doing – share your logic) Make notes in your own voice

We’ll talk more specifically about your research proposals, But now that you’ve done some research How do you go about incorporating other writers’ work into your own?

Recall that other scholars’ ideas should provide support, evidence, context for your argument…

…they should not be the backbone of your writing— You are becoming a part of the ‘culture of enquiry’ in which your ideas are … “informed by but separate from those of [your] sources” (Gallant, 2011) *Especially avoid “the world according to ____” and excessive quotation…)

Writing academically Know the rules on using intellectual property Carefully indicate the work of others and your own work in your notes Integrate source material into your work with clear citations. Use a standard documentation/source guide (e. g. APA, Vancouver, IEEE) Double (or triple) check everything before submission — and don’t forget to check the work of group members***.

Some techniques that have worked for others Find a way to keep track of your references without losing the flow of your writing. (But start the literature cited page immediately, and add to it as you go. ) Student tips: Cue cards– can be shuffled Insert/comment feature Organize topics— numbering? Create clear file names

What exactly do we have to cite? The quick answer is: Everything! Well, okay. There are two big exceptions: Your own thoughts and ideas* General knowledge (but be careful about what is general knowledge).

Back to the how. Generally speaking, there are three main techniques or methods of incorporation. Although much depends on the nature of the material and your purpose, you’ll see and use the incorporation of Quotations Paraphrases Summaries

Quotations Must be identical to the original – word for word. Must be indicated as a quotation in the text (with quotation marks or blocking) Should have a ‘lead-in’ Must be attributed Should be used sparingly, if at all, in academic (especially in scientific) writing.

When do we use direct quotations? When we need a sample of a writing style or dialect. When the way the speaker/author has said something is as important as what they have said. To state the exact phrasing of a policy or law. For specific words or phrases pulled from the text. There are special considerations when using a chart, graph, etc. from another source. Follow your citation style guidelines. As always, remember to include proper citations in each of the above cases.

Paraphrasing Interpreting or restating source material in your own words. Please note: It is not just a rewording or rearrangement of words, and it is not just replacing words with synonyms (Beware of reaching for your thesaurus here!) Remember, even though you have used your own words, the thought still belongs to another scholar. Paraphrases must be attributed

Summarizing Synthesizing and extracting the main idea(s) and expressing it in your own words. Significantly shorter than original and takes a broader overview of material than paraphrases or quotations. Must be attributed

The research proposal Is an action plan that provides the rationale, justification, and description of your study. Clearly states problem and associated hypotheses Frames your research and links it to previous research Explains proposed method & plans for data analysis (qualitative/quantitative, both? )

Three key questions to keep in mind 1. What are we going to learn from as the result of the proposed project that we do not know now? 2. Why is it worth knowing? 3. How will we know that the conclusions are valid? From Adam Przeworski Department of Political Science University of Chicago and Frank Salomon Department of Anthropology University of Wisconsin. The Art of Writing Proposals http: //www. ssrc. org/workspace/images/crm/new_publication_3/%7 B 7 a 9 cb 4 f 4 -815 f-de 11 -bd 80 -001 cc 477 ec 70%7 D. pdf

Refining your research question • Read over sources • Ask questions such as: – – – • What is known about the topic? What are the gaps on the topic? What has been proposed as ‘future directions’? How can existing studies be improved? Can similar ideas be explored from a different perspective, different goodaboutlife. blogspot. com focus group, etc? Come up with a specific question of interest – – Ask: Do I want to analyze, explain, or take a position on a topic? Ask: “How” or “Why” questions about a topic http: //owl. english. purdue. edu/owl/resource/545/01/

Identifying Gaps • Is the evidence in a study convincing? —Is it clear how evidence supports the argument? If no, how improve? —Are alternatives considered? —Are limitations considered? —Is the evidence weak or strong?

Research Proposal - purpose Persuasion? Convince readers that it is interesting and worthwhile How will your work make a difference in your field of study? To do this need to explain to readers: Big picture – general area of research Specific area of research and gaps Rationale for your project Research question Methodology Significance of your projected findings

Research Proposal - structure General area of research Specific area of research Rationale Question Approach Significance

Exercise (for another time) Discuss with a partner (in any order): General area of research Specific area of research Rationale Research questions Approach Significance Write down a point or two for each

Literature reviews Lit. review generally organized around ideas or groups of ideas rather than by author, publication etc. , or subject Not only a presentation of what is out there, but a critical analysis and synthesis of the existing literature in the field.

Why include it? Sets up theoretical, conceptual framework, appropriate methodology Establishes importance of topic, justifies choice of question. Practically, it provides background and context to your contribution

How much detail? Handlon’s (1998) film shot analogy: Long (background-acknowledged), medium(X 2), , close-ups (foreground –most direct relevance –most careful scrutiny. ) Circles represent topics, constructs, ideas, concepts.

The revision process

From the editors of Nature Structural and Molecular Biology “Making your story clear is not the same thing as dumbing it down. No reviewer has ever said that a paper was too easy to read. . . We do, however, get complaints from reviewers about how complicated, convoluted or downright confusing a paper is. . Clear, simple language allows the data and their interpretation to come through. Remember that clarity is especially important when you are trying to get complicated ideas across. ” pg 139 Scientific Writing 101, Nature Structural and Molecular Biology 17 (2010) doi: 10. 1038/nsmb 0210 -139

As you examine the draft Read aloud (you will notice more errors) Question yourself critically. Would it make sense if you hadn’t written it? Anticipate readers’ questions and try to identify gaps.

Some science (and other) writing/revising tips Provide reader with essential information (decide on relevant details) One idea per sentence general rule of thumb Try short sentences -especially in first draft, can combine them later (short/long=good flow). *Each paragraph should be centered around a main point or idea –use topic and concluding sentences, and remember to pay attention to links between ideas (more on transition later)

Writing/revision tips continued Be clear and unambiguous; use key words, define others Give the sense in the fewest words. Value each word and know the meaning & context. Make every word count. “Extra” words & phrases divert attention. Avoid quite, some etc. (vague qualifiers) – be specific.

Say what you mean (and carefully consider subject and action) Smith’s (2003) research investigated the effect… Who did the work? Consider: Smith (2003) investigated the effect…

Be specific: Many insect species have been described. Nearly one million insect species have been described. The copper chloride treatment was not affected. Cells exposed to copper chloride divided at normal rates.

Build “bridges” for your reader (or, more on achieving transition) Use transition, or in some cases headings and titles, to guide reader through material. Don’t make the reader work, go back, or search for missing ideas/material. Share your logic.

Transitions may be needed Between sections: paragraphs summarizing material just covered and specify how relevant to next section. Between paragraphs: a summarizing statement with clue to context (at end of one, beginning of another. ) Within paragraphs: usually just a word or two used as cues [Adapted from Day (1998)] (e. g. furthermore, however, therefore, indeed, then, by contrast, subsequently, although, consequently, equally important, …) * remain aware of usage and context.

Closing reminders Look for help when (or before!) it’s needed… Approach your TA, professor, advisor, subject librarian or study skills coach Come in to see us for an appointment!

Resources/References: Canadian Press. 2008. The Canadian Style Guide Chinneck, John, W. Department of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University Dalhousie University Writing Centre-resources and direct communication, consultation, and slide preparation with Margie Clow-Bohan, Paul Hardman, Krista Patriquin Day, Robert A. 1998. How to write and publish a scientific paper. Gallant, K. (2011, January) Addressing unintentional plagiarism by introducing students to the ‘culture of enquiry’. [Presentation handout] Centre for Learning and Teaching, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS. Greene, L. 2010. Writing in the Life Sciences: A Critical Thinking Approach. Oxford University Press Hacker, Diana. 2009. A Canadian Writer’s Reference Handlon, Joseph, 1998, as described in Rudestam 1998 Hart, Chris. 2003. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science imagination. Sage Publications limited, London Howard, Rebecca Moore, Tanya K. Rodrigue, and Tricia C. Serviss. "Writing from Sources, Writing from Sentences. " Writing and Pedagogy 2. 2 (Fall 2010): 177 -192. Keene, M. , K. Adams and M. Clow-Bohan. 2007. Instant Access Knisely, Karen. 2005. A Student Handbook for Writing in Biology. Levine, S. 2008. Writing proposals. MSU Paul, Alana. 2006. Purpose of Writing Lab Reports in Psychology & A Survey of Anxiety in Vampires and University Students. Mac. Donald, Brock. 2011. Oral presentation at CASDW (Canadian Association for the Study of Discourse and Writing) conference in Fredericton, May 27, 2011. Pechenik. , Jan A. 2004. A Short Guide to Writing about Biology. Rudestam, K. & R. Newton. 1998, 2007. Surviving your Dissertation. Library of Congress For further details or questions on references please contact Janice. Eddington@dal. ca, Dalhousie Writing Centre