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.