A Scientific Approach to Writing for Engineers and Scientists

Robert E. Berger

• Publisher: Wiley-IEEE Press
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781118832523
• eBook ISBN: 9781118832561
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Engineering General
• Index: Technology & Engineering

A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO WRITING

Technical ideas may be solid or even groundbreaking, but if these ideas cannot be clearly communicated, reviewers of technical documents—e.g., proposals for research funding, articles submitted to scientific journals, and business plans to commercialize technology—are likely to reject the argument for advancing these ideas.

The problem is that many engineers and scientists, entirely comfortable with the logic and principles of mathematics and science, treat writing as if it possesses none of these attributes. The absence of a systematic framework for writing often results in sentences that are difficult to follow or arguments that leave reviewers scratching their heads.

This book fixes that problem by presenting a "scientific" approach to writing that mirrors the sensibilities of scientists and engineers, an approach based on an easily-discernable set of principles. Rather than merely stating rules for English grammar and composition, this book explains the reasons behind these rules and shows that good reasons can guide every writing decision.

This resource is also well suited for the growing number of scientists and engineers in the U.S. and elsewhere who speak English as a second language, as well as for anyone else who just wants to be understood.

1
Introduction to the Approach

The kinds of writing that engineers, scientists, and technical experts create can be very different than most other kinds of prose. In its need to be highly technical, descriptive, complete, and explicit, writing can quickly become convoluted. This book seeks to identify the most common writing mistakes made by scientists and engineers and to present a “scientific” approach to avoiding these mistakes. The idea is for scientists and engineers to approach writing in the same way they approach the problems they work on: methodically, with an understanding of underlying principles and the reasons behind these principles. In this introductory chapter, I attempt to describe this approach and provide some suggestions for using this book.

1.1 An Objective Approach to Writing

When I think back to when I was younger, back to when I was in elementary school, it appeared as if my fellow students were divided into two groups: (1) those that were good at math and (2) those that were good at English. I was in the former group. I liked the logic and precision that accompanied arithmetic and then mathematics. By following a systematic approach to a problem, one could arrive at the correct answer. These answers were right or wrong, without any in-between.

On the other hand, English always struck me as a bit fuzzy, especially when we got to English grammar in junior high school (now called middle school). While there were plenty of definitions and rules, it seemed to me as if there was no way to systematically apply the rules. I would write a paper, and the teacher would return it with “corrections” to the sentences I had written, without any explanation as to why those corrections were preferred. I now see that the teacher was behaving as the typical editor I described in the Preface—rewriting my material in a way that made sense to her. Another teacher might agree with the way the sentences were written in the first place or might write a different version entirely. It appeared to my middle-school self that no systematic or common approach to the writing of sentences existed.

Many of us in the good-at-math group went on to become scientists and engineers. In these professions, we could focus on posing seemingly more tangible problems and pursuing a systematic approach to solving them. However, we did not have to spend much time in science and engineering before discovering that an ability to communicate effectively in writing was essential to a number of critical functions:

1. When applying for funding, the lifeblood of research and business, the scientist or engineer must effectively communicate a number of important concepts—including the problem to be addressed, the proposed advancement in the state of the art, the qualifications of the investigator, and the benefits of achieving success—in order to convince reviewers to endorse the application and recommend it for funding.
2. When submitting a paper to a technical journal, the scientist or engineer must convince peer reviewers that a significant scientific problem has been addressed, that the technical approach represents an improvement over approaches attempted in the past, and that the solution advances the state of the art in a particular field.
3. When seeking resources to commercialize technology, the technical champion must prepare a business plan to convince a potential investor that the new technology has market potential, that the intellectual property is protected, that customers will want to buy the product, that the management team has the wherewithal to commercialize the technology, and that significant profits can be made.

The three critical functions listed above will be used as examples in Part IV of this book. However, these functions are not the only instances that require clear written communication. The everyday activities of scientific and engineering work require written communication to professionals (both inside and outside your organization), to clients, and to the public.

So we engineers and scientists often find ourselves in an awkward situation: we must navigate the subjective waters that constitute “good writing,” in order to forward our ability to advance in the more objective discipline of our choosing—science or engineering. But is the process of writing, especially the process of writing sentences, as truly subjective as it seems? Is it possible that a set of fundamental principles existed all along and had not been shown to us in a manner that made sense to our training? Is it possible that the sensibilities of those of us in the good-at-math group were such that we were not able to recognize those principles? If so, what would it take to communicate those principles to scientists and engineers?

Perhaps what it would take is an approach presented by another scientist or engineer, an approach in which (1) the fundamental principles are clearly stated, (2) the distinct categories to which these principles apply are clearly defined and represented using technical terminology, and (3) the principles are illustrated by many examples of technical writing. The presentation of such an approach is the purpose of this book.

1.2 Reasons and Principles for Good Writing

I don’t know about you, but I like to have a good reason for the things I do professionally. Scientists and engineers are always expected to justify their work in very specific (almost formulaic) ways:

• Are you planning an investigation? Consider some typical headings one might use in describing the investigation: (1) Rationale, (2) Experimental Design and Methods, (3) Analysis, (4) Potential Pitfalls/Alternative Approaches, (5) Expected Outcomes. Typically, the rationale comes first because it explains the reason why the proposed approach is likely to answer the question that drives the investigation.
• Are you conducting an experiment? What will be the independent and dependent variables? For what reasons are the independent variables retained in the experiment more important than the ones left out?
• Are you selecting a material for a particular application? For what reason did you select one material over another?

It may not be as obvious to scientists and engineers, but good reasons also can be used to guide the mechanics of writing. Is there a good reason for inserting a particular idea at one position in a sentence instead of another? Is there a good reason for using commas to separate this idea from the rest of the sentence? Is there a good reason for presenting the items in a list as bullets, rather than leaving them in a paragraph? All of these questions can be answered in the affirmative. Moreover, I believe good reasons can be found to guide every writing decision. We do not need to write by instinct alone.

Essentially, clear written communication can be approached as a set of principles, each of which is substantiated by sound underlying reasons. Some of these principles can be stated as follows:

• Distinguish between the core idea of a sentence and any auxiliary ideas, which we will call qualifiers.
• Use commas to separate nonrestrictive qualifiers (do not use commas for restrictive qualifiers).
• Do not put more than two qualifiers in a sentence (with a few exceptions).
• Ensure that lists satisfy the principle of equivalence—all items in a list should be treated the same way.
• Clearly distinguish among the distinct items in a list.
• Ensure that each paragraph makes a single point and is sized for ease of understanding on the part of the reader.
• Write so that sentences in a paragraph flow from one to the next.
• Arrange paragraphs to enhance an argument.

In this book, my intention is to (1) unveil these principles and others, (2) explain the reasoning behind them, and (3) demonstrate their validity through numerous examples gleaned from technical writing. As with any practice, the more you apply these principles in your writing, the more likely they will become habitual, and the more likely your communication will be understood by your readers.

1.3 The Upside-Down Approach

Technical Communication is an ongoing field of research with a long history [1–4], supported by a dedicated set of academic journals (including, for example, Technical Communication, Technical Communication Quarterly, and the Journal of Business and Technical Communication). Topics covered in these journals and others encompass a wide variety of subjects, including the teaching of technical writing [5, 6], the teaching of technical writing to non-native English speakers [7, 8], and the teaching of technical advances to support technical communication [9, 10]. Many universities offer degree programs or academic certificates in this field [11, 12].

Academicians in Technical Communication teach courses in writing to science and engineering students, using a number of textbooks (e.g., [13–17]). The approach presented in these books teaches writers to focus on the big picture—namely, higher order concerns of purpose and structure—before narrowing down to the fine-tuning of writing sentences. Typically, these treatises (1) begin with an overview of the technical communication environment; (2) discuss the planning, researching, and organizing of documents, with attention to the intended audience, collaborations, and ethical issues; and (3) end with a set of chapters devoted to the preparation of particular types of documents (memos, reports, proposals, correspondence, instructions, etc.). Well into the discourse, some of these textbooks include a chapter on writing style—in rare cases, a short presentation of writing mechanics is included—but this subject represents only a tiny fraction of the full textbook.

Other books on writing are targeted toward practicing scientists and engineers [18–22]. Although shorter, the approach taken in most of these books is similar to that taken by the textbooks discussed above. (However, one of them is focused primarily on the writing of research reports [21], and another is essentially an English grammar book with subject matter arranged alphabetically [19].)

In contrast, scientists and engineers have been trained to use a narrow-to-broad approach. They understand that in science and engineering, one first needs to master fundamental tools before applying these tools to more complicated problems. Thus, in mathematics, one first learns algebra and calculus before taking on partial differential equations; in mechanics, the motion of simple bodies must be understo...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Series page
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Dedication
• A Note from the Series Editor
• Acknowledgments
• Foreword
• Preface
• 1 Introduction to the Approach
• Part I: SENTENCES
• Part II: LISTS
• Part III: WORD CHOICE AND PLACEMENT
• Part IV: BEYOND SENTENCES
• References
• About the Author
• Index
• IEEE PCS PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING COMMUNICATION SERIES
• End User License Agreement