The Role of IMRAD in the Scientific Discourse
How a simple paper format can define the Discourse as a whole
Each area of study in the fields of the natural and social sciences contain specialized language, knowledge, and connections within them.
Although some of the information appears to be associated with certain areas specifically, most of this knowledge is relevant in the entirety of the field. For people who are or who aim to be part of the community of science, being aware of the contingency and the complexity of the field as a whole is helpful in order to attain this identity. James Gee, a noted linguist and author of Literacy, Discourse, and Language: Introduction, uses the word “Discourse” to represent these types of identities or roles one plays in the world.
He defines a Discourse as “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)
Gee also created what he calls his ‘building tasks. With these building tasks Gee works to explain how parts of a Discourse piece together and become functional. Gee’s work, as well as Christina Haas’ research done on a college student studying biology help to introduce how specific aspects of the field of science are used to determine who holds this desired identity. In Haas’ work we see an element of the field of science called the IMRaD writing format used frequently.
Through her findings as well as a helpful tool called the ‘IMRAD Cheat Sheet,’ we can make a connection between the student and her hopeful role in the Discourse as a scientist.
There are many ways to become immersed in a Discourse- either you’re born surrounded by it, your primary Discourse, or you acquire it from an outside source, most likely as you develop over the course of time which is termed as a secondary Discourse. Some particular secondary discourses include either a hobby or a field of learning and are typically gained through what Gee calls an “apprenticeship.”
An apprenticeship is the “enculturation into social practices through scaffolded and supported interaction with people who have already mastered the Discourse.” (Gee 7)
With this, Gee claims that one helpful way to begin gaining knowledge on a Discourse is by learning from someone else who already knows all of what the Discourse entails. We can see this sort of learning done from Christina Haas’ research. The student Haas researched, Eliza, hoped to become a scientist by the end of her time at school. The learning tool that Gee calls an apprenticeship is seen throughout her college career.
To begin her first and even second year as a college student, Eliza was reading texts in an autonomous way- she wasn’t engaging in her readings nor did she look further into the texts for some sort of deeper meaning. Haas calls this style of reading as “context-less” and the texts as “objects.” (Haas 50)
By Eliza’s junior year she took on a job in a research lab and was beginning to become a more sophisticated student. She read not only to get information, but to learn about scientists and the structures of papers in the field of science.
By her senior year she was finally able to gain a “rhetorical frame” which meant that she began to recognize that “behind scientific texts are human authors with motives, authors who are also interested, but sometimes uncertain…” (Haas 74) This newly acquired rhetorical frame lead her to understand and connect on a deeper level- as one in the Discourse of science.
But Eliza did not do this all on her own.
An important aspect from her transition as an autonomous reader to one with a growing rhetorical frame was her apprenticeship (or research job) in her junior year. Through her apprenticeship she worked with an individual familiar with research and in the field of science as a whole. This worked to expand not only her knowledge in general, but of the way she saw all aspects of the Discourse.
Eliza began to change her mindset from viewing texts as objects to a more goal-oriented mindset, focusing on “what people are doing” and “where the technology is going in the future.” (Haas 64)
While working in this apprenticeship and throughout her remaining time as a student, she experienced the research papers. Typically, research and scientific findings are given to the public as a research paper in the form of the IMRaD structure. To understand the IMRaD structure it is important to be a part of, or to be learning about the Discourse of science. This is where we can use Gee’s building tasks of analyzing a Discourse to understand why the IMRaD structure plays an important role in science.
The Building Tasks: Connections
One building task that is seen a lot throughout the IMRaD format of scientific papers is the connections. They are “the relevant connections and disconnections between things and people in a context.” (Fiano 67) These connections are essential for those who are outside of or not part of the Discourse.
- The first aspect of the IMRaD format, the introduction, makes the main connection for the entire paper. In the introduction the “current state of research” (IMRAD Cheat Sheet) is discussed. This allows for an explanation of the base of the research itself. We find connections between the research and the readers here, allowing for the readers, either the general public, students, or other researchers, to understand the reason for the paper being presented.
- The discussion section of the paper is used to “connect these findings to other research” and “use these flaws as reasons to suggest additional, future research” (IMRAD Cheat Sheet) This, in turn, allows for people to acknowledge previous research that has been done and can eventually lead those who are in the Discourse to further conduct research stemming from the given topic.
These connections are relevant for people both in and out of the Discourse, and help to establish the importance of the IMRaD structure as well as provide insight about how the paper functions as a useful tool and piece of language in the sciences.
Knowing the uses and the purpose of the IMRaD structured paper and its relevance to the natural and social sciences allows for individuals to continue, create, or refute research. It is important to recognize that for people in the Discourse, these scientific papers have a different meaning than they do for those outside of the Discourse.
The Practices
The IMRaD structured paper is not just important for those who are researching- but for those who claim the role as a reader.
Another building task that is useful in evaluating the role of the IMRaD paper in the scientific Discourse is the practices it conveys. These practices are what the members of the Discourse actually do and how they enact their actions. One common practice or method in writing the IMRaD style paper is the results section.
- In the results section of the IMRaD paper a comparison of other research done on the topic is included. The results show “the outcomes of the research.” (IMRAD Cheat Sheet)
In order to know how to approach the results section of the paper, you must be familiar with the way it is written and what is included in each section. A good example of these practices is Haas and her research done on Eliza when she makes the transition from an autonomous reader to one with a developing rhetorical frame. She could connect with the work she was doing and the work that others have done through these IMRaD structured papers over the course of her development. It takes someone who is familiar with the common practices of the paper and more importantly, someone who is familiar with the Discourse to understand the way this paper is written. Like Gee mentions in his work, you’re either in a Discourse or you’re not.
While the IMRaD structure may seem like a small part of the Discourse, it is a key way to establish who or what constitutes the identity achieved through the sciences.
Identities
In the Discourse of science and in the role of the IMRaD style paper as a whole, some significant identities are also present. The building task of identity is used to shed light on the “identities relevant in a context” in order to determine who or what plays a role in the Discourse. (Fiano 67).
If we step back from analyzing just the IMRaD paper as a piece of language and look at other aspects that make up the Discourse of science, we can notice identities by distinguishing who specifically learns science. To determine who learns science we can use Eliza again as an example. Students studying or who have studied fields of science such as biology, chemistry, or anatomy, are pursuing the participation and an eventual acceptance into the Discourse of science. By dissecting pieces of the Discourse such as those individuals who are within it, we can recognize the Discourse in a deeper way, therefore establishing the identities it encompasses.
We can clearly point out identities in the Discourse that belong to both the writer and the reader, although those who do the writing may not be the same people who conduct the research, and those who are reading may hold many different identities too. These readers may be other researchers, students, or members of the general public looking for information. These identities let us know who is in the Discourse and what kinds of fields it holds so that rather than it being generalized, we can narrow down certain aspects of it.
While the Discourse of the natural and social sciences embodies many things, some aspects in particular serve a useful purpose in allowing us to notice which parts are the most important. One of the most important and prevalent parts of the Discourse is the IMRaD structured research paper. This paper alone allows for a dissection of the Discourse that shows many of the relationships and actions taken to understand how it works. While there may be other ways to go about understanding the Discourse, this one in particular aids in analyzing the format of the papers derived from it, as well as who writes or reads the work done within it, and why the papers and research is done in general.
By using Gee and Haas to understand the function of the IMRaD research paper, we can notice that there are many things that make it up such as the practices it conveys and the connections it makes relevant. Using the IMRaD format allows us to interpret one small piece of the Discourse of the social and natural sciences, and also begins to introduce how complex the Discourse really is. The IMRaD structured paper for this Discourse proves to be a small tool that grants those who are outside of it a way to begin to understand it and its internal make-up.
