[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

RE: Science Writing and the Effective Science Paper



Tracy L. Ford (dino.hunter@cox.net) wrote:

<Great that they teach that class. But I've never gone to college and I've
had several papers published with out that class. Much to the chagrin of
Ken Carpenter :), alls I've ever done is read articles and followed that
format (I hope those authors had taken that class).>
  
  I do not want to make this sound like I was somehow dissing those who
have not taken this class, as I too have not. I was referring to a method
in which this form was taught. I would like to point out that there was an
exception to taking the class, and Tracy has done this: read enoyugh
papers, you get the feel for how they are written; aside from being
"taught", you are given sample papers to copy off of and this is not
dissimilar what I have seen and others have done. Tracy's papers I think
are very well written and are, like Bakker's, written with a flavor that
makes them fairly enjoyable to read. Sometimes you need to step outside a
strict formulaic paper and move to somethign that has a lot more freedom
in it, while keeping ones priorities clear; i would make an example of
much of what Bakker and Tracy write, for example, but I would never
recommend a shoddy, what I can get to support my theory idea to be
published without something rigorous in the method in which the data is
examined.

  Cheers,

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com