Analysis of an article on a project to renovate the science learning environment

            Chang and Lee´s (2010) paper describes an E- learning process to be applied at National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) meant to improve the Science Classroom Learning Environment (SCLE). In the introduction section, the authors establish the three cycles or moves. In the first one, they provide information about the research that has been done on traditional and modern methods on learning environments. Later on, in the second move, they state that practices at school have not been innovated or improved showing significant progress. Therefore, they turn to the third move where they express what their project is about. The authors state its characteristics and its goal, namely, they aim at modernizing school practices by establishing a Center for excellence in e-Learning Sciences (CeeLS). The statement they use to introduce the third move is both descriptive and purposive. The authors use the present simple and present perfect tenses in this section and they also make descriptions by using passive voice. They also describe the research directions using the modal verb should.

            Under the subheading Project framework, on a separate section, they describe the method. The methods section does not seem to follow all the academic requirements suggested by APA (2007). The present passive and the future tenses are used. After a short introduction, they describe four stages. They include information about procedures, participants, goals and materials to be used. The information given about the participants does not seem to be very precise because they do not mention the exact number of students that take part or from exactly which courses they are chosen, the authors name a number of institutions that could collaborate but they do not specify which ones collaborate. The words participants, materials and procedure are not typed on the left margin. On the following page, the authors include a chart with a timeline which portrays the four stages in their framework. On top of this, they outline the possible results of the project.

            As regards, the references, it can be pointed out that they do not follow all the academic requirements determined by APA (2007) because the word reference is not centered and the entries are not double spaced. They have used two different quotations on page number 7. They seem to have the same source.

References

American Psychological Association (2007). Concise rules of APA style. Washington,

            DC: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

Chang, C., Y., & Lee, G. (2010). A major E-learning project to renovate Science learning environment             in Taiwan. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 9 (1), 7-12.Retreived June 28^th from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ875757.pdf

The Importance of Well Written Abstracts in Research Papers (RPs): A Deep Analysis.

The aim of this paper is to make a comparative analysis of the abstracts of four research papers belonging to the fields of education and medicine. Abstracts are the first contact readers have with papers;  however, they are the last part researchers write. As they summarize the major points made by the author, they tend to be short, concise and neat. They are generally written in no more than 250 words. Swales and Feak (1994) state that research papers abstracts consist of a single paragraph containing from about four to ten full sentences. The main purpose is to attract readers to go on reading the rest of the paper. According to APA (2008), an effective abstract uses one or more well developed paragraph which may be able to stand alone, strictly follows the chronology of the report and is intelligible to a wide audience, containing no abbreviations or specialized words. The present analysis will be based on distinguishing the main linguistic characteristics of abstracts, their structure, and their classification as well as their approach.

Considering their classification, abstracts can be either descriptive or informative in nature (Swales &  Feak, 1994). Informative abstracts are extracts from articles, chapters or as in this case, from research papers (RPs). The texts belonging to the medicine field, by Jorgensen´ s ( 2009 ) and Wijeysundera´s et. al (2009), follow this informative characteristic, as they provide a considerable amount of data on what the researchers did. As regards their structure, it can be asserted that they both belong to the structured type of abstracts since they are divided into sections with italicized headings which identify the main sections in the RP. The headings for both articles are: Objective, Design, ,Setting, Participants, Main Outcome Measure, and Results. Therefore, it can be assumed  that both  abstracts on medicine field follow the Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussions (IMRAD). Most researchers agree on this formula which is generally followed when writing this part of the texts. Other relevant characteristics these two abstracts share are connected to their linguistic features. In both abstracts the objectives are expressed with infinitives, as for the next sections they are written in full sentences in the past tense, negatives are avoided together with the use of abbreviations.   The vocabulary used is formal.   One main difference between these two pieces  of writing is that the  conclusion of Jorgensen´ s ( 2009 ) abstract on breast cancer is written in the past tense whereas the conclusion of Wijeysundera´s et. al ( 2009) abstract on cardiac stress is in the present tense, probably because of the kind of conclusion reached, which proved the hypothesis that guided this research.  Following Swales and Freak  (1994) again, the approaches of  these two abstracts can be characterized as  results-driven since they concentrate on the research findings and what might be concluded from them.

With reference to the abstracts of the educational field, by Rammal (2005) and King (2002), it can be pointed out that they are similar in the sense that they can be classified as indicative since they do not describe what the researches did in detail. Instead, they summarize the main information in the RP, and they do not provide extensive information about the results. Regarding their structure, they are unstructured since they are not divided into different sections under subheadings. In fact, both of them consist of only one paragraph. King´s (2002) abstract on DVDs seems to have the appropriate length whereas Rammal´s (2005) abstract  on video does not, it is quite short.  The first one contains seven sentences in all and the latter only five. Analyzing the linguistic features of abstracts, it can be seen that both of them are written in the present tense. In both abstracts it is possible to notice the use of the impersonal passive voice, full sentences and no negatives; abbreviations and jargon are not included.   As for their approach, they follow the lines of the summary approach of abstracts as defined by Swales and Feak (1994) because in just a few sentences they outline the different sections of the RP.

On the whole, Jorgensen´ s ( 2009 ) and  Wijeysundera´s  et. al    (2009)  abstracts on the field of medicine are very structured, mainly following the IMRAD formula.   This characteristic can be thought as a consequence of another relevant aspect they share: They are results-driven, which means that they concentrate on results findings.     On the contrary, the article by King (2002) on the use of DVDs and Rammal (2005) on videos are not structured, but seem to have the function of attracting the readers’ attention, of generating the need of reading the rest of the article, which is one of the main functions abstract have.    As for the linguistics features of the abstracts, it can be seen that the fourth of them respect the tenses generally used for this kind of writings, all of them are written in full sentences and no examples of negatives, abbreviations and jargon can be found in either of them.  

References

American Psychological Association (2008). Concise rules of APA style. Washington,     DC: British

            Library Cataloguing-in –Publication Data.

Jorgensen, K., Zahi, P.,& Gotzsche, P., (2009).   Breast cancer mortality in organized mammography

screening in Denmark: comparative study.   British Medical Journal, 2010; 340:

  c1241.doi:101136/bmj.c1241

King, J. (2002).   Using DVD features films in the EFL classroom.    The Weekly column, 88.

Rammal, S.M. (2005). Using video in the EFL classrooms.   CDELT 25^th Annual Symposium, April

            12-13, 2005. Ein-Shams Univertity, Cairo, Egypt.

Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. 

 Ann Harbor, MI: The Universty of Michigan Press.

Wijeysundera, D., Scott B., Fraser E., Austin, P., Hux J., & Laupacis A., (2009).   Non- invasive

cardiac stress testing before elective major non-cardiac surgery: population based cohort study.

British Medical Journal, 2010;340: b5526.doi:101136/bmj.b5526

Analysing the Results, Discussions, and Conclusions Sections of Research Papers

           

            The purpose of this paper is to make a comparative analysis of the Results, Discussions, and Conclusions sections of two research papers (RPs) belonging to two completely different areas, namely the fields of education and medicine. The article belonging to the medicine field is a case study research carried out to analyze the interrelationship between kidney and cardiovascular disease. It is organized into Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusion. The article on education is  concerned with a research implemented to foster the use of Second Language outside the classroom with a Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) programme. It is divided into introduction, methodology, results, and limitations; each of these sections is also subdivided through the use of sub-headings. While Di Angelantonio, Chowdhury, Sarwar, Aspelund, Danesh and Gudnason´s (2010) medical article, exposes the three sections commonly found in research articles separately, Barss`s (2012) educational article integrates the results with the discussion altogether. However, the authors have mostly included all the requirements that these three sections have to follow for a research paper to be academic.

            Both of the articles in discussion are descriptive in nature. The past simple tense is used to describe the Results sections.  At the beginning of the Results section of her article, Barrs (2012) explains in a descriptive way “A four-week project was set up during the 2010 football World Cup, utilising a Moodle forum, whereby students were randomly assigned a country`s team to follow and had to post a message on the team`s tournament performance.” (p. 15).  In her article, Barss (2012) divides her Results section into two parts, which are the periods she had for her action research, where she provides the results of the research by presenting the main findings and summarizing the data connected to the question of the paper with text and figures. In contrast, the article on medicine, has different headings in order to separate the different paragraphs of the Results section. While Di Angelantonio`s (2010) paper includes the discussions section separetely from the results, Barss (2012) describes the results and discusses them in the same section.

            Regarding the presentation of data, both articles use texts to state the results of their studies and include graphics such as tables or figures where the reader can refer to.  After showing the collection of data through three different Tables, the education RP compares the results and gives an explanation for the differences in this way; “As can be seen from the data in Tables 1-3, the number of postings in general as well as the number of interactions that went beyond a singular posting reply pattern were low, especially considering this was a 4-week project.” (Barrs, 2012, p.16).  As regards the description found in the medicine article, a more complex way of describing data is included when the results of the Tables and Figures are analysed by the authors. Di Angelantonio et. al (2010) explains “Addition of smoking status, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, and diabetes to a coronary heart disease risk model containig only age (and stratified by sex) increased the C index from 0.6453 to 0.6963.” (p. 4).  The tables included in the educational paper comply with the basic rules established by APA (2007). It contains six tables and one figure. All of them are correctly numbered and the headings are italiced and all the words are in capital letters. The medicine research paper, instead, does not respect certain requirements. It includes four tables and two figures. They are numbered but the titles are not in italics, and only the first word is capitalized. They are accompanied by notes in a smaller typeface which are meant to clarify the information presented.        

            The Conclusions section in the research paper on education is preceded by limitations which explain the negative points or difficulties that had to be faced during the research, the author has included information about certain changes that had to be implemented. Barrs (2012) makes use of tentative language to express certain degree of probability in her findings which is more academic in the educational field. The Conclusions section in Barss’s (2012) article starts by stating the relevance of the research and the importance of developing this kind of study which is highlighted throughout the whole paper. This is presented as a positive experience which is seen as a way of solving the question introduced at the beginning of the article: How to make learners practice the language outside the classroom. On the other research paper, the Conclusions section is preceded not only by limitations but also by strengths. The conclusions are presented in the present tense and the author shows certainty about the statements.

            On the whole, it can be asserted that even though there seems to be no direct relationship between the fields of education and medicine, there are certain similarities between both articles. RPs tend to comply with certain rules no matter which field they relate to. The reader is provided with the necessary information about the situations described on both papers. They contain clear explanations of the background applying both the clarity principle and the reality principle, which help the reader understand the problem. Finally, they provide a possible solution which is also evaluated by the authors.  All in all, it may be assumed that objectivity is present in both papers. However, Di Angelantonio tends to be less moderate than Barr when he draws his conclusions, this may be due to the fact that his research has been conducted on the scientific field where the data can be described as more precise than the one in the education field.

                                                           References

American Psychological Association (2007). Concise rules of APA style. Washington,     DC: British Library Cataloguing-in –Publication Data.

Barrs, K. (2012). Fostering computer-mediated L2 interaction beyond the classroom.      Language and Learning & Technology, 16(1), 10

Di Angelantonio, E., Chowdhury, R., Sarwar, N., Aspelund, T., Danesh, J., & Gudnason,          V. (2010).Chronic kidney disease and risk of major cardiovascular disease and           non-vascular mortality: prospective populationbased cohort study. British Medical         Journal, 341:c4986. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c4986

A Comparative Analysis between Two Academic Papers from Different Fields

            

            The purpose of this paper is to provide a comparative analysis of the introduction and methods sections of two research papers belonging to two completely different areas, namely the fields of education and medicine. The text on education follows the organization pattern which research papers should contain to present their introduction.
The three moves of the Create a Research Model (C.A.R.S.) stated by Swales and Feak (1994), creating a research page, establishing a niche and occupying it, are neatly organized and clearly depicted. On the other hand, the text on medicine does not follow those requirements so clearly.

            In Sun and Chang`s (2012) educational paper, both authors make reference to all the previous research that has been carried out in the field using the present perfect tense and the present simple tense to describe the characteristics of blogs. The key term blog is  defined by means of a purpose statement or generalisation which introduces the main idea of the text from a general point of view.  The authors also establish a contrastive definition, which makes the reader realize that the word blog differs from the terms listservs, discussion boards and wikis. As it was mentioned before, the three moves of the the C.A.R.S are clearly expressed in the text referring to blogs. The first move, whose aim is to create a research paper, clearly refers back to previous studies which have been made in this field of using blogs to facilitate the development of a second language writing community. The authors make reference to different past studies, as Sun`s (2009) study on examining speaking practice on blogs and Noytim`s (2010) study showing that meaning served as the prominent focus rather than form in the blogging environment. Through these examples, it is clearly seen that the literature review is embedded in move one of the introduction, making reference to previous research in this area. Making use of a negative opening and raising a question, Sun and Chang (2012) state the gap they found in the literature review:

Though, past literature has shed the light on the ways blogs can be used to encorage language learning and learners´participation in writing practices, little, if any, empirical research has been done to examine how interactions in blogs help EFL graduate students develop academic knowledge and writer identities. That is, if blogs are powerful tools in language learning, how do EFL students´ blog interactions demonstrate and facilitate how they process the knowledge they receive and make sense ogf who they are as emerging academic writers? (p. 44)

This last question will be the motivator for the authors to run the research and write about the present study.

            In contrast, not even a simple definition is mentioned in the introduction of Roth et al. ´s (2010) article which directly provides an outline of past research “in the implementation of vaccines to avoid mortality in low income in low income countries”. (p. 1). The text on vaccines show the beginning of the second move by raising the doubt about BCG vaccines having non-specific benefitial effects on overall mortality.In this way, the authors provide different examples which suggest that much of the previous research has been accomplished on assumption rather than on randomized studies, shedding a light of doubt on the effectiveness of the revaccination of BCG to avoid infant mortality. In this way they create the need to run their research because this lack of information leads to more investigation on that field.

            In relation to the methods section, it can also be stated that Roth et al. ´s medicine article does not follow the patterns most researchers and writers coincide with, such as its division in three subsections: participants, materials and procedure. However, they do make use of process paragraphs, including passive voice clauses in order to describe a process. In contrast, Sun and Chang´s article does organize the methods section into participants and procedures, and these two subsections are described in detail. The materials subsection is missing, probably because not much information could have been included due to the nature of this research. It is also possible to find examples of passive voice in this article as well.

            After contrasting these two articles, it can be concluded that Roth et al ´s article seems to follow the requirements for this kind of writing, presenting the information in a clear and neat way in both its introduction and methods section, whereas Sun and Chang´s article does not. The information in this article turns out to be confusing for the reader because its organization is not very clear and it is loaded with too many details and description which, as Reid (1994) stated, should be avoided by good academic writers.

                                                                    References

Noytim, U. (2010). Weblogs enhancing EFL students' English language learning. Procedia Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2(1), 127-1,132.

Reid, J. (1994). The process of paragraph writing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Roth, A., E., Stabell Benn, C., Ravn, H., Rodrigues A., Lisse, I., M., Yazdanbakhsh, M., Whittle, H., & Aaby, P. (2010). Effect of revaccination with BCG in early childhood on mortality: randomised trial in Guinea-Bissau. British Medical Journal, 340, pp. c671-c671. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c671

Sun, Y. C., & Chang, Y. (2012). Blogging to learn: Becoming EFL academic writers through collaborative dialogues. Language and Learning & Technology, 16(1), 43-61.

Sun, Y. C. (2009). Voice blog: An exploratory study of language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 88-103. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num2/sun.pdf.

Swales, J., M., & Feak, C., B., (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Harbour. MI: The University of Michigan Press.