PRINCIPLES OF ACADEMIC WRITING

The organisation of thoughts into a coherent piece of writing is what many students find is
difficult to achieve. The task is less formidable, though, if it is seen as a sequence of sub-tasks,
the completion of one leading on to the next. Subtasks which precede and prepare the actual
writing process comprise the collecting of information on a given topic, and using efficient
reading and note making skills for gaining, ordering and reviewing the information. The actual
writing process, which follows, mostly is not a straightforward putting together of finished
thoughts but a heuristic process. It is a process of drafting and revising concepts and of clarifying
goals and thoughts before they eventually enter into the final product.

In this and the following chapter we discuss principles of academic writing, writing as a heuristic
process, how to focus the goal of a paper, types of academic papers, how to create a coherent
piece of writing, and criteria for assessing academic papers.

PRINCIPLES OF ACADEMIC COMMUNICATION AND WRITING

In 1975 the philosopher H.P. Grice stated four maxims of conversation which found much
acclaim. They are:

The maxim of quality

Speakers' contributions to a conversation ought to be true. They
should not say what they believe to be false, nor should they say
anything for which they lack adequate evidence.
The maxim of quantity
Speakers' contributions should be as informative as is required for the
purpose of the conversation. One should say neither too little nor too
much.
The maxim of relevance
Speakers' contributions should clearly relate to the purpose of the
exchange.
The maxim of manner
Speakers' contributions should be intelligible - in particular, they
should be orderly and brief, avoiding obscurity and ambiguity.

With special regard to written productions, the principles of academic communication can be
re-stated in the following form:
 HONESTY
State only that which you can support with factual evidence. Always
acknowledge the source of both evidence and ideas.
REALITY
Explain what needs to be explained, but assume your reader has basic
knowledge of the world and needs no explanation of trivial matters.
CLARITY
Be clear and direct in your style. Be direct about your aims and
objectives. Don't use more words than are necessary.
RELEVANCE
Consider only that which is relevant to the topic, focus and objectives of
your argument or discussion. Do not include anything that you cannot
link to your argument or show its impact on the topic discussed.
Do not put crucial information in your conclusion that has not
previously been discussed in the body of your work.

[http://www.sussex.ac.uk/langc/skills/]

WRITING AS A HEURISTIC PROCESS

There is cognitive reciprocity of being able to clearly state what you want to say and forming a
clear concept of it. This is why most academic publications go through one or more draft versions.
Drafts are critically reviewed before a final version is produced. Good writers are their own first
readers and critics. A critical review constructively feeds back into the range and quality of what
one knows and can do. This is why writing often contributes no less to the improvement of the
writer’s knowledge than to that of a reader’s, and why it is a good academic exercise. Even good
writers are hardly ever totally satisfied with what they wrote; they keep re-writing it. We may
say, therefore:

Writing is a heuristic process, and the real art of writing is re-writing.

Good writing starts with the skilled collection of the available information on a given topic. This
requires efficient reading and note making strategies. Experienced writers know, too, that time
is a scarce commodity and they plan their time accordingly. Good time management saves stress
and leads to better results. It is essential, therefore, that students learn to organize their work.

Focussing the goal of your paper

Readers expect of writers that they clearly state their topic and observe the four principles of
academic writing. But good writers keep an eye, too, on who their readers are. They tailor their
writing in style and content to their readers’ age and knowledge and to their assumed
 expectations. For seminar papers it is best to see your fellow-students as the
readers of your writing. That will give you an idea of how explicit you have
to be on certain points, which technical terms you can use, and what you do
not need to explain laboriously.

Readers are irritated if authors do not make clear the relation of their topic
to what they write. Good writing therefore starts with focussing the task and
goal of the paper. Frequently a given topic or task contains explicit verbal
indications of what is required. Sometimes, however, this is only implicitly
contained in a given task or topic and needs to be made clear by the author.
The following table presents a selection of keywords that represent certain
task-types. They simultaneously highlight strategies for analysis and writing
that are typical for academic papers.

Identify and describe the parts of X, and explain how they relate to each
other or work together. If it is a theory or claim or argument which you
analyse
analyse, see if the claims on which they are based are true or false; present
and discuss points ‘for and against’. This may lead to an evaluation
Describe X and Y; highlight similarities and differences. A comparison
compare requires that different texts or objects are subjected to the same set of
categories by which they are compared. This may lead to an evaluation
Similar to compare, but focussing on the differences between two or more
contrast
things. Like compare it may, but need not, lead to an evaluation.
Look up the definitions of a given term or subject in dictionaries,
define encyclopaedias, or handbooks; compare them; name a definition which
seems most appropriate to the subject
State which form, structure, and/or other properties characterize a given
object; they can be the shape and spatial relations of surface forms, a
describe
sequence of events, or a relation of cause and effect, or other statements
of facts.
Identify and describe one, two or more statements on the given topic; then
analyse them for whether they are statements of facts or opinions; compare
discuss
them, and give points for and against, before drawing a conclusion from the
points presented
Similar to analyse: Describe and divide into parts a given topic; distinguish
major from minor characteristics of it, hierarchically distinguish super-
examine
ordinate from sub-ordinate features; add a critical comment if that seems
appropriate.
Examine the cause and effect of, or reasons for a given object or statement,
explain and give a detailed account of them; make clearer, possibly by giving
examples or illustrations (a figure, or diagram).