Any Grad Students/Scientists/Technical Writers?

[cass]

Are there any grad students or writers of technical/scientific papers on the board who want to discuss what helps them get their thoughts down?

(It's not *quite* the same as writing fictional works....but I don't think it's so different that it shouldn't be in this section of the boards....)

I'm in the middle of my dissertation, and I'm finding it helpful to write as though I'm explaining it to an outsider to the field....

[Blaze]

I was a tech writer for about 20 years.  Did museum exhibits, plumbing and zoning codes, landmarks preservation law, hazmat regs, and National Register nominations. 

In all those disciplines, you have to write as if you are explaining to someone outside the field, and also be clear not to leave loopholes or ambiguities that could possibly be exploited (Plumbing code, Zoning an Preservation law.)  Hazmat regs need to be written so a fourth grader can understand them. 

What is your dissertation on?

[Ulfgeir]

At work, we have had some discussions about how to write the documentation/guides for our systems.  We ended up with a documentation is for us technicians, and a guide is for the users. I don't quite agree with such a clear distinction, as you often also need guides for technicians.

The differences is basically that the documentation contains more info about about how things are set up, while the guides are supposed to contain pictures and clearer descriptions on how to do something. And yes it is a fine line between writing a guide such that you write it as a refresher for someone who knows what they are doing, and a step-by-step instruction for someone who doesn't know anything on how to use a computer. Yes we have some users like that...

/Ulfgeir

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Working research associate here, fifteen post-PhD years of working as a scientist.

how I do academic writing appears to be slowly and with extreme psychological discomfort, largely because it feels so damaging of all the things I have learned for writing fiction.  I appear to be quite good at explaining things directly to people in small numbers though.  (I work on the interface between computers and molecular biology, so i do a lot of explaining concepts from one discipline to people trained in the other.)

[cass]

I was a tech writer for about 20 years.  Did museum exhibits, plumbing and zoning codes, landmarks preservation law, hazmat regs, and National Register nominations. 

In all those disciplines, you have to write as if you are explaining to someone outside the field, and also be clear not to leave loopholes or ambiguities that could possibly be exploited (Plumbing code, Zoning an Preservation law.)  Hazmat regs need to be written so a fourth grader can understand them. 

What is your dissertation on?

I'm writing about the controlling factors for the shapes of (river) deltas in map view-- basically, why the Mississippi Delta has a very different shape when seen from above than the Nile than the Ganges-Brahmaputra than the Indus.  I'm trying to add numbers to a qualitative classification system that's been in use for ~40 years to help try to drag the field kicking and screaming into the new millennium.

Since this is probably only going to be read by people in my field (if at all--I am under no illusions as to the wider appeal of this project), I probably don't have to worry about leaving loopholes-- but I suppose my committee is liable to willfully misinterpret!

"Slowly and with extreme psychological discomfort" is a very apt phrase....

[superpsycho]

First is to explain the premise of your thesis succinctly, then establish a foundation for it in a clear and logical manner.

I always tried to target one or two levels below the expertise of my audience. If you try to speak to the level of a novice, then the amount of material needed to lay a foundation of understanding is so large you often lose the point by the time you begin to provide substantive support for your argument.

Attempting to speak directly at the expected level of your audience, will often cause you to lose a certain percentage them.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Attempting to speak directly at the expected level of your audience, will often cause you to lose a certain percentage them.

Speaking and writing are different, though. Writing, you can assume people are there because they want to be reading it.

Academic speaking, on the other hand, 10% of the audience will like no matter what you say, 10% will disagree no matter what you say, and the other 80% are thinking about sex.  (I understand it's possible to modify these figures by doing academic speaking that is actually about sex, but I have no experience in that direction.)

[superpsycho]

Speaking and writing are different, though. Writing, you can assume people are there because they want to be reading it.

Academic speaking, on the other hand, 10% of the audience will like no matter what you say, 10% will disagree no matter what you say, and the other 80% are thinking about sex.  (I understand it's possible to modify these figures by doing academic speaking that is actually about sex, but I have no experience in that direction.)

Even when the work is written, the work is speaking to an audience. The audience is this case is the review committee then a suitable publication for peer review, which assumes some level of expertise.

And yes, when speaking to a live audience you're lucky if you don't lose a number of them to a pure lack of interest or to many of life's distractions, especially if the conference is in Las Vegas and most of them were up partying half the night.

[Sully]

That's actually really interesting, I'd totally read that thesis provided it's able to be absorbed by a layman.

[cass]

Even when the work is written, the work is speaking to an audience. The audience is this case is the review committee then a suitable publication for peer review, which assumes some level of expertise.

And yes, when speaking to a live audience you're lucky if you don't lose a number of them to a pure lack of interest or to many of life's distractions, especially if the conference is in Las Vegas and most of them were up partying half the night.

Or to the free beer offered by the conference organizers! (No joke. The lines wrap around entire aisles in the exhibit hall.)  It's kind of comforting, really: one lousy talk won't derail your career.

There's a certain amount of lack-of-expertise inherent in any committee that is required to have members from outside the field, not to mention a certain amount of...reluctance? to adopt mathematical methods in a field that is traditionally dominated by observation and (verbal) description.  I'm going to have to write my thesis in accessible language for those reasons, but I also want to write in a style that's understandable to everyone.  I hate it when technical papers play "hide the verb" with subordinate clauses-- it makes it really hard to grasp the authors' main argument.

[superpsycho]

Or to the free beer offered by the conference organizers! (No joke. The lines wrap around entire aisles in the exhibit hall.)  It's kind of comforting, really: one lousy talk won't derail your career.

There's a certain amount of lack-of-expertise inherent in any committee that is required to have members from outside the field, not to mention a certain amount of...reluctance? to adopt mathematical methods in a field that is traditionally dominated by observation and (verbal) description.  I'm going to have to write my thesis in accessible language for those reasons, but I also want to write in a style that's understandable to everyone.  I hate it when technical papers play "hide the verb" with subordinate clauses-- it makes it really hard to grasp the authors' main argument.

Like any good mystery, you have to ask interesting questions then answer them until you've laid out the whole story. If you just say the first step is to determine such and such, then it's going to be pretty dry. If instead you say, the first question is 'can we determine such and such, within a specific range of accuracy, considering we have these variables', then you've got a chance people will pay attention. If the answer isn't obvious, then they'll want to know the answer.

 

[Amber]

I tend to start with my figures.  I'll construct a general outline of the paper by ordering the figures in the way I want to tell my story.  Write up that results section first, sometimes only in outline form, then fill it out as I go.  The most painful part for me is always the introduction/literature review.

I've done a lot of writing both academically (despite quitting pre-PhD) and in a corporate setting.  The two are very different writing styles.  It's always useful to consider the audience.  I hate science writers who purposefully make the language inaccessible, so I tend to write in plainer language than my advisers ever liked, though my bosses in the corporate world seem to prefer it.

[Walking Man]

I'm just a baby grad-student (only one year into my Master of Polisci) but from what I've done so far I can say that fiction and academic work are like night and day. Like baseball and golf, both involve hitting a ball with a stick, but that's as far as the similarities go. That said, I'm hoping to one day be published in both of those categories so any advice on either would be appreciated.