Duality Of Writing In Biology

Everybody has their own methods for writing; however, I believe there is always room for improvement. Chapter 3 in Everyone’s an Author has shown me that writing involves processes that need to be mastered through constant practice. It also revealed helpful tips on how to develop writing processes that can help write effective papers.

"The structure of my argument is simple and, I think, unexceptionable: scientists behave in the following ways; those modes of behaviour have (here theory enters) the following essential functions; in the absence of an alternate mode that would serve similar functions, scientists should behave essentially as they do if their concern is to improve scientific

The disciplinary perspective Lamott is catering to most is creative writing and writings that have strict time limits. The authors discipline is creative writing when it comes to food reviews for her magazine company. Lamott believes that her situation can be used with all forms of disciplines. In addition to Lamott’s discipline, Baker’s writing perspective comes from a teaching or informative discipline. Baker is trying to help teachers learn effective teaching skills when it comes to writing. However, Johnsons discipline is strictly for psychology disciplines and how they can improve papers and grades all together. On the other hand, Makenzie’s discipline is in the study of biology and wants to explain why writing is important in that field of study.

Scholarly writing is no different from all other writing, except, beside it having a purpose and having an audience like any other writings, scholarly writing is evidence-based (Laureate Education, 2012). It is important, since the scholar-practitioner write for a specific audience, that his or her material be free of personal opinion, assumption, and bias. When writing a scholarly material, a scholar-practitioner has to be objective in tone, write clearly, concise, produce a mechanically correct writing that contains evidence-based material.

Writing is a difficult, complex and laborious activity. There are areas that need work to be done and get better at. Scholarly writing is directly tied to critical thinking, one need to improve on its critical thinking skills to be able to write clearly, concisely and precisely. This well help in presenting thoughts in a cohesive and logical sequence while being specific. One will work hard to do away with overlong sentences and try to make every sentence a complete thought. Another area that will need some improvement is paragraphing, one will learn how to begin each paragraph with a topic sentence then followed by supporting sentences that illustrate, explain, or clarify main point. In doing this, the coherence, unity and emphasis (CUE)

Instead scientists begin with a hypothesis to explain why there is a problem and then gather evidence or data to test it” (Hankinson, Lesson 4b).

Shuey has her doctorate and shared with me her dissertation and thesis she has written. Both were the length of roughly 300-400 pages and I experienced deep confusion when Dr. Shuey shared that she hated scientific writing. She can effectively and easily share her thoughts verbally, through presentations, but, the staleness she finds in the writing of her field does not hold her attention for very long. This has been a major challenge but, it has not prevented her from successfully doing research and writing. This aspect of science needs to be just as accurate as the data collected but, it must also written deliberately to share what the data

Writing is something that we tend to associate with English class and not with Biology. Being able to write is very important in a Biology career because it is an important part of communication and being able to get your job done. Dr. Richard Musser, who is an Interim Chairman and a Full Professor in the biology department at Western Illinois University, specified the necessity of being able to write well. He has been in this position since July 1st 2016. Dr. Musser talked about how he had to use writing to apply for the position he is in, the several types of writing that he is responsible for, to whom he writes, the technology used and if the writing that he does gets review by others.

In The Economist’s article, “Let’s Just Try That Again” (2016), the anonymous author claims that meticulous retesting of previous experiments is a vital part of the scientific process, and though it has been neglected over the years, it could be experiencing a renascence. He or she supports their assertions by introducing an upcoming scientific journal dedicated to rechecking old studies, explaining the reasons the act of verification fell into obscurity, and showing the failings of previously unchecked experiments. Their purpose is to bring the matter to their readers attention in order to stimulate further interest and discussion on the topic. The author displays an excitement and hopefulness towards the future of scientific research as well

idea on how scientific information is organised (Koomen et al., 2016). It also shows students that

Isn't Science hard enough? Why break the willing research spirit with destructive words? Why blow an artic wind of misery on the forever-striving scientist punished like Sisyphus by repeated failures? Isn't science built on science? Don’t bubbles merge to make bigger bubbles? And if bubble bursting there must be, then let’s try and burst our own bubbles so others do not have to. Our papers will gain strength and authority.

Interview from others student can be useful data to claim the importance of how scientific writing shapes us in educational system. The first step I would manage my bibliography and literature view as center of activity. Over the time the lists of articles read and cited becomes significant works. For applying bibliography from peer-reviewed, books and other sources allow me to generate more concepts. Using Mendeley as a tool to generate bibliographies, and annotation of texts, also encourage communication between scientists around the sharing of references. Technology currently impact on my ability to work. Useful data on how scientific writing using language to communicate between scientific community and outside the community for exchange common interests, and their requirements to work as scientific platform. In order to make the content interesting to audience; visual aid including maps, charts, graphs, and photographs will helps audiences comprehend the reading much better than the plain contexts. Using proofread from writing center and peers may reduce chance of getting confuse words: heat has an effect on the reaction and heat affects the

When a reader view my paper I worry that my ideas and expressions are not clear. The value of being able to express ideas through writing is important. Producing written communication skills is an important process that involves planning and expressive

A hypothesis (to be scientific) needs to be testable. Without the ability to test the hypothesis, we would never know whether it’s true or false. Truth and honesty are incredibly important values in science.

The instructor briefly described the standards of academic writing including Audience, Purpose and Strategy, Style, Language, Usage, Voice, Flow, Grammar, Bias, Consistency, Spellings, Punctuation, Heading, Fonts. She mentioned how important it is to understand and apply these issues in our papers.