GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
A major goal of this course is to give you
practice and feedback in scientific writing. We will mainly focus on two types
of written assignments, commentaries and referee reports. Samples
of both types of writing will be given to you. These two types of assignments
have different goals and different grading criteria.
In addition to those specific criteria, the
graders will be asking the following general questions about all your
assignments:
•
Is the paper summarized adequately and accurately? You won’t get
the details perfectly correct every time, especially technical details.
However, you should strive to achieve a good scientific understanding of the
paper before you start to write. When you compose your summary, it’s
important to state the scientific findings of the paper in your own words
as much as possible. It’s not acceptable to simply lift five sentences
from the paper verbatim and string them together. This is plagiarism. It also
implies that you don’t understand the paper, or that you aren’t
reading it critically.
•
Is the writing organized? You should outline your essay before starting
to write. Also, when writing in the referee report format, it’s
important to list each specific criticism or question as a separate point, and
to indicate clearly which of these are major criticisms and which are minor
criticisms. Before you begin, familiarize yourself with the organization of the
writing samples we are giving you.
•
Is the commentary/critique thoughtful? Don’t strive for
profundity, but do give your comments some real thought. Ideally, you should
demonstrate that you are able to take a critical stance in evaluating how well
the authors have succeeded in their goals.
•
Is the tone of the writing appropriate and consistent? Avoid abusive
language, purely rhetorical gestures, and colloquialisms. Even when
you’re stating a strong criticism, you should remain professional.
A) COMMENTARIES (750-1250 words total)
We will ask you to write a commentary on some
of the assigned papers. This type of essay is designed to be published in the
same issue of the journal as the paper itself, and is aimed at the general
readership of that journal. The goals of this type of essay are:
•
to summarize the paper for the reader,
•
to provide context and background, with the goal of clarifying why this paper
is significant for the field.
You should assume the paper has already been
accepted by the journal in its current form. This type of essay generally
adopts a positive tone, but it is perfectly acceptable to note (diplomatically)
a major caveat associated with the paper.
Your commentary should address the following issues:
•
What are the major questions addressed by this study?
•
Why are these questions interesting? How does this related to the background/context
for this paper? (In other words, what gap in the literature does this study
fill, or what controversy does it help settle? Some of this background will
come from what you learn in class, but you may find that some assignments
require a bit of extracurricular reading on your part.)
•
How did the authors go about answering this question? Briefly summarize the design,
experimental methods, and conclusions of the most important experiment(s)
in this study. It is not necessary to describe every figure; instead, focus on
what is most important.
•
What major conclusions did the authors reach?
•
[optional but often appropriate] Point out major caveats in the study
(if any), and outline obvious future directions of this research (if
any).
Feel free to address these points in whatever
order makes the most sense to you.
You are encouraged to look at these sample
commentaries for guidance: Sample Commentary 1,
Sample Commentary 2
B) REFEREE REPORTS (750-1250 words total)
We will ask you to evaluate some of the
assigned papers as if you were refereeing them as unpublished manuscripts. This
type of essay is designed to be read by the authors and the editor. The main
goals of this report are:
•
to provide constructive criticism to the authors, and
•
to provide guidance to the editor in deciding whether to accept or reject it.
A referee report generally begins a summary
of the basic results of the paper, accompanied by a brief statement of your
overall opinions. We are encouraging you to make this narrative portion of the
report about ~500 words long. Next, you should list your major criticisms (if
any), separated by numerals or bullet points. Finally, list your minor
criticisms (if any), again in separate points. A “major criticism”
would be defined as a scientific concern that is so serious that if the authors
cannot address it, it would be grounds for rejecting the paper. In general,
“major criticisms” tend to be broad and “minor
criticisms” tend to be specific, but that’s not always true.
Your referee report should address the
following issues:
•
What are the major questions addressed by this study?
•
Please comment on the level of interest/significance associated with
this study. In answering this question, it is often appropriate to comment
briefly on the background/context for this paper. In the final analysis,
the significance of a study depends partly on the interest level associated
with the major questions, but also on how effective this study is in clarifying
the answers to these questions. A bad study on an interesting topic is not very
significant.
•
What are the major results/conclusions of this study? This portion of a
real referee report is generally succinct (perhaps just a couple of sentences).
For the purposes of these assignments, however, we encourage a somewhat longer
summary (~500 words).
•
Are the authors’ conclusions supported by their results? If
different interpretations would be equally plausible, please discuss these
alternatives.
•
Do you think additional experiments are required before the authors can
persuade you of their conclusions? If so, what?
•
As a referee, would you recommend publication of this study (in the
journal where it ultimately appeared)?
Again, feel free to address these points in
whatever order makes the most sense to you.
You are encouraged
to look at these sample referee reports for guidance: Sample Referee Report 1, Sample Referee Report 2.
These examples are actual homework assignments
from last year's course along with the instructor's comments.