Scientific Discourse
A World of Communication
By: Laura Netti
Science is a very important part of universal communication and knowledge. Forms of communication allow for a structured and organized way of staying connected and delivering and receiving information. Without the ability to communicate scientific findings, the world would not progress in the field of science. Therefore, it is crucial for scientists to communicate information correctly.
This article uses ideas from James Gee’s journal “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics Introduction” to identify the roles language and communication play in the scientific community, and how they contribute to Gee’s idea of Discourse. Science is a very important Discourse whether one is a scientist, studying science, or just wanting to understand what is going on in the world.
The IMRaD structure gives scientists an organized and universal form of communication. A.J. Meadows’ article, “The scientific paper as an archaeological artefact”, provides information of the evolution of scientific papers and their significance.
The process of learning and becoming part of the Discourse of science is shown in Christina Haas’ study on a student’s rhetorical development throughout college. In Haas’ article “Learning to Read Biology: One student’s Rhetorical Development in College” a student named Eliza is observed as she pursues her goal to become a scientist by majoring in biology. This study shows the progression in how Eliza read text starting in her freshman year to her senior year of college. Without the ability to read rhetorically, there would be a lack of communication between scientific findings and flaws.
Communication is key and therefore the use of the IMRaD structure and how it connects to the Discourse of science is essential.
Following Rules
In order for one in the Discourse of science to share their findings and reveal any flaws they must follow the rules that correspond to the Discourse of science, such as the IMRaD format. Scientists must follow rules specific to the Discourse.
They must act, talk, and most important write like a scientist. Science is considered a Discourse. Discourses are not only what one says but how one says it, acts, and presents oneself. According to Gee,
“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” (7).
A scientific Discourse is to the same extent as any other Discourse one is in during their daily life. For instance, much as one’s job has specific terminology, scientists have their own forms of language that allow them to carry on in an elementary and unmistakable fashion. To the eye of someone not familiar with this language, it may seem completely foreign, but to the trained eye, it’s straightforward and familiar.
An important part of being in the Discourse of science is to correctly write a scientific article that consists of the appropriate structure and is informative to both other scientists in the Discourse and people outside the scientific community. Meadows states, “the construction of an acceptable research paper reflects the agreed view of the scientific community on what constitutes science” (27). Therefore, the structure in which scientific papers are written, are a reflection of the scientific community. The present day scientific community is technological and continuously growing, which is why there is a need for the IMRaD structure.
The IMRaD structure provides a consistent form of communication in order for scientists to share information both efficiently and effectively. Scientific articles are seen as reliable sources of information. However, how reliable would these sources be if the scientists writing them did not correctly portray the information? Without this structure, science would lack a reliable form of communication and organization. Therefore, scientists must be part of the scientific Discourse in order to reveal their scientific findings.
Recognizing who, what ,and where
To be part of the Discourse of science requires one to be able to recognize what is being communicated and where. Although an identity-kit is essential, one must be recognizable to others as part of the scientific Discourse. One who is in the Discourse must also be able to distinguish those who are and are not in the Discourse. These recognitions are essential when scientists are both writing and reading scientific articles.
The IMRaD structure is composed of four parts which include the introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Each section provides different information, some more important than others. According to Meadows, scientists
“are more inclined to browse-scanning particular parts of the paper to derive items of interest to them as rapidly as possible. This strategy…is one cause of the more highly structured papers that are characteristic of modern scientific journals” (30).
This shows that when one is part of the scientific community they are able to gather what is being communicated by knowing the correct spots to look without reading the scientific article from beginning to end. Thus, scientists are able to pinpoint specific spots of scientific articles to gather the information needed and understand what is being said. According to the IMRaD cheat sheet, the Discussion section
“allows readers to skip the beginning of the discussion section and understand the main ‘news’ in the report” (IMRaD Cheat Sheet n.p.).
The IMRaD structure is therefore essential to understand and know as a scientist because without being in the scientific community one would not have the knowledge or be able to skip the beginning of an article and still be able to recognize what is being said. Although scientists must be able to recognize where and what is being communicated, they must understand the importance and reasoning of what is being said.
Rhetorical Reading and its Importance
Scientists must think and read rhetorically in order to understand the importance of scientific findings. Rhetorical reading is used to see a deeper meaning of text. Rhetorical reading is being able to see
“motives of the 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 chose certain words” (Haas 48).
Many people read text just how it is presented to them and do not think any further into the actual meaning of what the text truly means. Haas calls this autonomous text. According to Haas, “the belief in autonomous textviews written as discrete, highly explicit, even ‘timeless’ entities functioning without contextual support from author, reader, or culture” (45). In other words, reading text autonomously has no meaning behind it and one doesn’t get anything from it, other than just going through the motions of reading and maybe even memorizing. By reading text in this way, one will not be able to understand and interpret what is being communicated in scientific articles.
During Haas’ study, Eliza read text autonomously in her first two years of college. She mainly memorized and tried to understand the text, but this only got her so far. Eventually, in Eliza’s junior and senior year of college she began to develop a rhetorical reading habit. She no longer tried to memorize text, but she began to give the author an identity, and think deeper into what the author was saying. Haas states,
“acknowledging or attempting to understand these elements of discourse-constructing a rhetorical frame which includes authors, readers, motives, relationships, and contexts-is what I call the process of rhetorical reading” (48).
It is very important for those in the Discourse of science to be able to read rhetorically because if they are not able to look further into the text and understand the author’s motives and reasoning, they may miss something very important. Therefore, for scientists to maintain accurate and correct information they must be able to read rhetorically in order to understand and share scientific articles. It is important to read rhetorically, but how can the information be used for future advancement?
Future Advancements
Sharing scientific articles allows scientists to read, understand, and use the information for future advancements. Scientific articles provide those in the Discourse of science with findings that enable new knowledge. The Discussion section talks about both scientific findings and flaws. The IMRaD cheat sheet states that scientists
“connect these findings to other research, discuss flaws in the current study, use these flaws as reasons to suggest additional, future research, and state the implications of their findings for future policy or practice” (IMRaD Cheat Sheet n.p.).
The IMRaD structure allows for those in the scientific Discourse to reveal their findings and flaws, so they can not only reflect and look back on what they did, and what went wrong, but to provide other scientists with this information so they can further their research and studies.
With this information given, scientists can make further advancements by both learning from others’ mistakes and using other scientists’ findings to backup their research and continue further research and experiments. Hence, one article is connected to another through the process of a structured form of language, and if this connection is broken it can lead to many misunderstandings. “Using this response as an example of ‘successful training’ is only possible because the authors aware that language is more than grammar, are unaware that communication is more than just language use” (Gee 6).
Communicating is more than just knowing and using the language, communication only works effectively when one shares information, and others absorb the information and then do something about it. Scientists can understand, read and write all the findings and flaws they want, but unless others in the Discourse do not use what is being said, there will be no further advancements in the scientific field. Thus, the scientific community is always growing with new findings, and flaws that lead to future research, and advancements.
Science: A World of Continuous Growth
Those in the Discourse of science must keep up with the change and growth of the scientific community. The scientific field is constantly growing and scientists must keep up not only to remain part of the Discourse, but to continue to write and share information. Gee states,
“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” (6).
Therefore, as the scientific community grows, scientists must continue to use the correct language, and characteristics that makes them part of the scientific Discourse. According to Meadows,
“Scientific papers are as carefully constructed as any archeological artefact: they reflect the requirements of the contemporary community, changing as it changes” (30).
Without the ability to fluctuate between change and recognize requirements for transfer, communication between scientists would most likely deteriorate.
Scientists must also be able to see moments of communication. Sign systems are “the relevant sign systems (e.g, languages, social languages) and forms of knowledge (ways of knowing) that are relevant in a context and how they are used and privileged or dispriviledged” (Fiano 67). Therefore it is important to observe the moments in which information is being communicated, and its relevance. Being able to do this will allow scientists to adapt to change in the scientific community.
Communication
Being part of the Discourse of science can be very challenging because it consists of many tasks that must be done correctly in order for information to be communicated adequately. In order to enter the Discourse one must be able to read rhetorically and use the IMRaD format when writing scientific articles. The IMRaD structure is a form of language for those in the Discourse of science and therefore is crucial when communicating both scientific findings and flaws. It provides information for future research and allows scientists to learn from other scientists’ mistakes.
In order for communication to be transferred between scientists, scientists must be able to pinpoint the moments of communication. Thus, recognize what is being communicated and where. Communication is only successful when information is transmitted, received, and understood. It is not useful to just know a language, one must be able to use the language to convey information and gather and comprehend the information. In order for any actions to be taken for future advancement, scientists must be able to adapt to a change in the scientific community.
The world relies on scientists to communicate their new observations. If done incorrectly it can cause a lot of chaos. Therefore, proper IMRaD structure is very important because it not only allows one to enter the Discourse of science, but it provides the world with a universal form of communication.
