Gateway into the Discourse of Science
Science encompasses every aspect of day to day life. It is a forever revolving door of complexity and mystery that refuses to relinquish its power over the world. Due to its diverse characteristics, specialists within certain fields of science are needed to help interpret and understand the scientific wonders, enacting a particular identity that allows them to flourish in what is known as their Discourse. Linguist James Paul Gee refers to the concept of Discourse in his article “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction” by stating, “At any moment we are using language we must say or write the right thing in the right way while playing the right social role and (appearing) to hold the right values, beliefs, and attitudes” (Gee 6). Within the scientific community, it is important to master every one of these combinations to be able to positively contribute to the endless line of questions that the scientific world proposes.
Relevance of the IMRaD Structure
Using prior knowledge, one will learn how to conduct their own research, obtaining the ability to pass their knowledge forward to ensure a progressive world that focuses on not only what can be learned, but what can be done as far as scientific advancements. This knowledge is best represented through what is known as the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) structure, a way of writing that allows scientists to communicate to others within the scientific Discourse.
Overarching Purpose of Science
The purpose of the scientific Discourse is to progress the study of scientific ideas for the good of society through proper means of communication and execution. For this to happen, one must gain the correct identity and acknowledge the identity of others, learn pertinent reading and writing skills, and obtain an apprenticeship under those who are already in the Discourse. Through these processes, one will gain knowledge about the IMRaD structure, its importance and how it helps expand the world of science.
Identity Within the Scientific Discourse
Being such a sophisticated field, there is a certain poise that comes with entering the Discourse of science. This poise can be considered one’s identity within the field, a concept illuminated by Gee that focuses on how others identify or recognize one as being functional within a Discourse. Gee states in his article,
“A Discourse is a sort of ‘identity kit’ which comes complete with the appropriate costume and instructions on how to act, talk, and often write, so as to take on a particular role that others will recognize” (Gee 7).
Fluently possessing all of these qualities is not only important to becoming part of a Discourse but for others to realize your position within that Discourse as well. It is clear that obtaining such an identity requires acquisition of more than just surface features, but in depth intellectual characterizations as well. Holding one or some but not all of these characteristics, deems one as an outsider while complete acquisition guarantees the label insider. AJ Meadows of the Primary Communications Research Center of the University of Leicester relates to Gee’s idea of identity in his article “The scientific paper as an archaeological artefact” where he explains the evolution of the IMRaD structure, its importance, and those who are able to use it correctly. He states,
“To an outsider, the contents of these papers appear to be mystic and wonderful: to an insider, they convey rapidly and efficiently information about the research that has been done” (Meadows 27).
To be considered part of the scientific Discourse, understanding content within a scientific article is extremely significant. Being able to write and talk about that content, enacting a particular persona, is how one contributes to the Discourse of science. If one does not know how to find, analyze and interpret textual evidence, then one will never be recognized as being in the Discourse of science by those who have already mastered such skills.
Characteristics of Insiders
As meadow says, insiders are able to read efficiently and rapidly, giving them an advantage over outsiders. This advantage is due to knowing the IMRaD structure of a scientific article. AJ Meadows explains the importance of the structures history, alluding to the idea that without such structure, topics within the realm of science would remain unexplainable stating,
“the lay-out is a consequence of a long evolution aimed at simplifying the complexity of scientific communication” (Meadows 27).
Through trial and error, scientists have constructed a format that entails an introduction, methods, results, and discussion section to allow others within the Discourse to gain knowledge and interpret information in a reasonable manner. Outsiders can only identify or understand certain elements discussed through the paper while insiders have a deeper engagement with the text. For example, Meadows explains the insiders perspective when he states, “the process of recording and transmitting research information is seen by most scientists as straightforward” (Meadows 27). Those who are in the Discourse see the structure as being reasonably comprehensible where an outsider would have a harder time gaining information as their ability to analyze such a paper is extremely limited. The deeper ones understanding, the more they are able to assert themselves in relaying the information learned to concepts of uncertainty. Those who view scientific articles for the purpose of solely gathering information, do not belong in the Discourse and are considered pretenders within the scientific field. These pretenders are defined by Gee as
“an outsider with pretensions to being an insider” (Gee 10).
Posing as an insider does not mean you will be seen as one since there is more to the Discourse than just going through the process of reading a scientific article. It is only those who view these articles with the intentions of gaining deeper knowledge of the topic at hand with hopes of applying that knowledge to conduct further research who are considered fluent within the Discourse of science. Meadows emphasizes the importance of such a format to ensure common understanding when communicating concepts as further research hinges on one’s ability to construct and utilize the IMRaD structure in an adequate manner. For this reason, insiders must understand their position within the Discourse while outsiders should strive to gain entry to help the study of science continue on a progressive path rather than remaining complacent.
The Importance of Reading Rhetorically
Gee’s concept of identity coincides with Christina Haas’s concept of rhetorical frame which she explains in her article “Learning to Read Biology: One Student’s Rhetorical Development in College.” In this article, she illuminates the learning process of her test subject Eliza, a college student, through the realms of various collegiate responsibilities. Rhetorical frame being one of these learning processes encompasses the participant’s relationships and motives in a piece of writing for a specific field in the Discourse. Holding the right identity within the Discourse of science allows one to make connections with others who have the same motives in that Discourse and relate different concepts to a common study. Haas explains the aspects of rhetorical frame as she states,
“useful to the reader is some representation of the motives of participants — why the author wrote the piece, why she or he chose the form that was chosen, why she or he used a particular structure or show certain words” (Haas 48).
Asking these questions enables the reader to see beyond the concrete text, and into the participant’s specific motives for writing about a particular subject.
Motives Found in the IMRaD Structure
The participants, often the scientists conducting the research, and their motives are eluded to through the introduction of the IMRaD Cheat Sheet as it emphasizes the importance of “explaining to your readers what problem you researched and why the research is necessary” (Carnegie Mellon University). To be considered part of the scientific Discourse, one must know how to properly introduce the research. The importance of such research will be translated as one’s motive for writing the paper and can only be done correctly through the use of the IMRaD structure. This ensures that the reader is not left with any grey areas as every concept is addressed clearly and concisely.
Why Value Motives?
A participants motives insinuate the importance for the research to be shared within the scientific community. Those within the Discourse begin to postulate the possibility of further research when the motives are seen as valid, proving the subject to be vital enough to continue studying. Through this understanding, the Discourse of science continues to expand its borders and reach out to others who may also have the ability to contribute within the Discourse. Only those with the ability to interpret such motives correctly and act with the same driven manner as scientists before them are worthy of holding a place within the Discourse of science.
Guidance Through an Apprenticeship
It is only possible to prove if one is worthy of acquiring a position within a Discourse through the means of an apprenticeship. Having an apprenticeship gives one the opportunity to gain knowledge that is not taught within the confines of a book, but rather through direct observation of somebody already in the field. Gee’s concept of apprenticeship relates closely to Haas’s explanation of mentoring involving her analysis of Eliza. Gee states the purpose of a mentor is to “apprentice someone in a master apprentice relationship in a social practice (Discourse) wherein you scaffold their growing ability to say, do, value, believe, and so forth, within that Discourse, through demonstrating your mastery and supporting theirs even when it barely exists.” In order to enter a specific Discourse, it is important to observe and learn from those who are already in the field as they are able to shed light on aspects that cannot be overtly taught through the isolating practice of self-teaching.
Effects of Apprenticeship in Real Life]
Eliza recalls her experience involving her mentor Shelley in her work study lab job by saying, “they gave me a project and when I need help or have problems, she guides me through it” (Haas 64). Eliza’s work study experience resulted in acquiring skills that would have otherwise been unattainable if not for her mentor. Haas explains some of these skills as she states,
“Eliza’s work with Shelley in the lab may also have contributed to her awareness of the social and rhetorical dimensions of discourse . . . she was concerned that readers of her lab journal be able to use the information there” (Haas 67).
Within the scientific Discourse, it is vital to be able to convey certain messages in a particular manner that allows others within that Discourse to be able to follow up with such findings and perhaps continue the research that has yet to be done. In order to do this, one must know how to write scientifically, which is where the IMRaD structure comes into play since it is a universal way of communicating with various experts within the science field. Being able to communicate to others within the field is imperative for the future of science, therefore, is a necessary skill needed to be acquired before one gains access into the Discourse.
Using Apprenticeship Skills in IMRaD
When Eliza came to the realization that she must present her information in a manner that made it possible for others to work with her research, she finally grasped the concept of the IMRaD structure. In the Discussion section of the IMRaD Cheat Sheet, it explicitly states,
“They [writers] connect these findings to other research” (Carnegie Mellon University 1).
In order to make this connection, Eliza had to learn how to write in a manner that allows those she is connecting with to understand the purpose of her experiment. Connecting to other scientists ensures the progression of science because it emphasizes the importance of further research. Only those that hold the correct identity and skillset within the Discourse, such as Eliza, are seen by others as worthy enough to continue that particular research.
The IMRaD structure proves to be a vital component when gaining access into the Discourse of science as it provides one with a structured outline for how the Discourse works and the elements that are most essential to understand. Being a means of communicating ideas rapidly and efficiently, it helps scientists gain more knowledge about a particular subject and alludes to future aspects of science that are worthy of being further investigated. Eliza is used as a prime example to express how one enters the Discourse of science and the skills needed to contribute to the field after reaching a certain position. Through acknowledgement of one’s identity and that of others, acquirement of pertinent reading and writing skills, as well as obtainment of an apprenticeship, one learns the IMRaD structure, its importance and how it helps expand the world of science.
Works Cited
Carnegie Mellon University . “IMRAD Cheat Sheet.” Global Communications Center. Carnegie Mellon University, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.
Haas, Christina . “Learning to Read Biology: One Student’s Rhetorical Development in College.” Written Communication 11.43 (1994): 43–79. Print.
Gee, James P. “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction.” Journal of Education 171.1 (1989): 5–17. Print.
Meadows, AJ. “The Scientific Paper as an Archaeological Artefact.”Journal of Information Science 11 (1985): 27–30. Print.
