Article structure MII7130 Academic Writing and Hypertext
24.10.2007, continued 6.11.2007
Participants?
| |
|Title
The text should fall under the title, and the title should cover the text.
Coverage rule:
• Few words - broad area Example: " Online communities "
• Many words - narrow area: Example: " Knowledge Building in Online Communities "
| |
|Author
| |
|Keywords
• 5 - 10 most imporant words = search terms
| |
|Abstract
Compress the article to max 200 words, without breaks. Write AFTER the actual article.
As short as possible! But make sure the idea gets clear.
Self-sufficient.
No references or links!
| |
|Introduction
||Background
• Existing work
• Research, projects, trends, technologies
Important: Identify gaps in existing knowledge to motivate your research.
Define your concepts.
Use graphics, or. e.g. concept maps to explain the concepts.
Divide Introduction to logical subtitles.
||Research questions
What do you want to reply to?
||Hypothesis/claim
• Hypothesis
= Claim to be proven by your research.
| |
|Methods
• (More on research methods course.)
Generally recognized methods to support the hypotheses/claims (research methods course). Refer to method literature.
• Data collection methods (e.g. survey, observation)
• Evaluation method
| |
|Implementation
How the methods (above) were applied in practice: survey, design, software etc...
• How data/material was collected
• Description of the procedure, e.g. How the design cycle was realized
• Implementation of feedback, iteration
• How the data was handled
| |
|Findings/results
What was found?
Demonstration of the working implementation:
• statistics
• tables
• simulation (link to e.g. applet)
• interface (image, link)
• video (link)
Just report what was found by the research. Save interpretations to conclusions.
Evaluation of the outcomes, leaning on some established method.
NOTE: In a short article findings can be part of the conclusions.
| |
|Conclusions
Start with PAST tense. What was done, reported on a higher level.
PRESENT tense (NOW):
• Report of the outcomes with careful epistemic position! Understate rather than overstate. Clayton blog post
What IS inferred on the basis of the data?
• "Based on the research results, one may..."
• "Our results suggest..."
Lean consistently on your concepts defined in Introduction. Hypertextual implementation: Anchor your basic concepts in Intro, and link to them from Conclusions. For markup in wikimedia, follow example.
Secure the consistency between Introduction and Conclusions. You can also go back to Conclusions, for example to scale down too bold claims.
Evaluation of the outcomes using criteria fixed in Methods. Was enough evidence found for the hypothesis?
| |
|Discussion
Stepping up to the general level (same level as intro).
Contextualizing the work: What is the contribution of the result to the field?
Implications: What can/should be done next?
Considerations for further work.
NOTE: In a short paper the whole discussion can be included in the Conclusions (e.g. Bauer & Bakkalbasi 2005).
| |
|Acknowledgements
• Thanks to the fundings, comments etc. (One or two sentences)
| |
|References
As discussed earlier.
| |
|Footnotes, endnotes
Additional information.
| |
|Exercise 1
• In teams/individually
Write main lines of a 'stunt' article.
| |
|Assignment (for the independent study week)
Those that were not physically present:
• Follow the examples and write a wiki exercise of an article
All:
• Compose a section of Implementation
| |
|Exercise 2
Present findings! Support with graphs, demos etc.
Conclude!
Discuss!
| |
|Assignment 2 (for 14.11.2007)
Write a compact abstract for another team's 'article'.
If there is something that you don't understand about the argumentation, contact the authors to clarify.
| |
|Guides
• Experimental biosciences guide
• Example article: Bauer & Bakkalbasi (2005)
| |
|
| Tallinn University
| IMKE
| IMKE static
| IMKE wiki
| Schedules
| IVA
| Last update 24.11.2007 13:16