[M.K. THOMPSON] Teachers` advice and writing in the real world

In high school teachers often require their students to write papers as a part of their coursework. They stress that students should always remember to address their intended audience. They urge students to include at least three pieces of "evidence" in each paragraph to support their hypothesis. They ask students to make sure that each element of the paper contributes to the message of the work.

The teachers` instructions seem a bit ironic from the students` perspective. In high school, the audience consists of a single individual: the teacher who will grade the essay. All of the evidence presented is intended to prove that the student attended class, paid attention and did his or her homework. And the message that most papers convey is simple: I worked hard. I understand what you have taught us. Please give me a good grade!

However, the teachers` advice is invaluable in the context of academic writing for professional publications.



Researchers in industry and academia write papers to share what they have learned in the course of their work with the larger community. Papers are opportunities to present new data, new ideas or new theories and to receive feedback on them. A paper can also be an opportunity to critique existing ideas, expand upon them or improve them.

In academic writing, the audience is real. At a small conference, perhaps only a few dozen people will attend a given presentation or read a paper. For a famous high-impact journal, the size of the audience can be staggering. Nature, which was the world`s most highly cited interdisciplinary science journal in 2008, has an estimated 669,000 readers of its print edition and more than 1.2 million readers online.

In academic writing, the audience is also critical. Readers respond to publications with letters to the editor and in articles of their own. They ask pointed questions when they see authors at conferences. On occasion, they will send a personal email to share their disagreement.

As intimidating as that sounds, it pales in comparison to the publication review process. Before a paper can be published in a scientific or technical journal, it usually must go through a peer review process. Submitted papers are emailed to experts in the field who read them, rate the writing and the content and then make a recommendation about whether or not the work should be published. The authors` identities are often hidden from the reviewers to ensure an unbiased opinion.

All of the reviews go to an editor who makes the final judgment about whether or not the paper may be accepted for publication. The result of the review process and all of the reviewers` comments are then sent to the authors to explain the editor`s decision and provide constructive feedback. Papers are usually accepted, provisionally accepted pending required modification, rejected with the suggestion to revise and resubmit or simply rejected.

The evidence in these papers is also real and usually takes the form of data which has been experimentally, statistically, computationally or analytically obtained. Readers scrutinize the evidence presented and often draw their own conclusions. In many disciplines, replicating an existing study is a common first step towards investigating a new research question. Thus, writers must also ensure that their results can be re-created using the documentation contained in the paper.

What does all of this mean for the novice academic writer? Murphy`s law states that anything that can go wrong will go wrong. (And if you recall, O`Toole helpfully pointed out that Murphy was an optimist.) So, young academic writers should assume that any paper that can be rejected will be rejected - especially if they are submitting to Nature.

The authors` job is to make their paper unassailable. Imperturbable. Rejection-proof.

At every turn, they must be prepared with facts, figures and citations with references to support their claims. They must prove that they are familiar with the literature, citing both the most famous and influential papers and the most recent. Sentence after sentence, they chip away at potential resistance. They beleaguer the doubters. They build a pyramid of proof, impregnable by the review process.

Language, too, is important. Strong claims must be softened ever so slightly. Opposing viewpoints must be considered. Criticism must be anticipated, respected and addressed. And, there must be room for discussion. A good paper will elicit that discussion, not preclude it.

If the authors are successful, the result will be a publication that is interesting, evocative and strong without being severe.

Of course, the academic world isn`t as frightening as it sounds. But the advice that your high school teachers gave you was real advice for real publications. Remember what they taught you. The time will come when you will need to use it.





Mary Kathryn Thompson, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. She can be reached at mkthompson@an.kaist.ac.kr. - Ed.