Hi, my name is Rebecca Vidra.

I'm a lecturer and Director of

Undergraduate Studies in the Nicholas
School of the Environment at Duke
University.
And I'll be your natural sciences
disciplinary consultant.
In this first video, I'll talk to you a
little bit about what we mean when we say
academic writing in the natural sciences.
Typically, we define the natural sciences
according to its five major branches which
as you see here are chemistry, physics,
earth sciences, biology, and astronomy.
However, there are many hybrid
disciplines.
Biochemistry being an obvious one.
And there are also many interdisciplinary
disciplines.
So, I am an environmental scientist.
So, not only do I bring together a few of
the core branches of the natural sciences,
like ecology, biology, chemistry and maybe
even some physics and earth sciences, I
also bring in some of the disciplines from
the social sciences, like policy,
sociology and, sometimes, history.
So, when I think about academic writing as
a scientist, I need to be thinking very
carefully about my audience from the
beginning.
Am I talking to a partiuclar gorup of
experts in ecology, for example, or a
broader group of experts across
disciplines?
This will help me determine my language,
the way I define terms, and even sometimes
the sources that I will cite.
I am more specifically a restoration
ecologist.
I've gotten to do some really exciting
work restoring coral reefs in the Florida
Keys.
These images can show you part of that
process.
I've also worked in urban forests where
exotic plant species have invaded and
really changed the scope of the forests.
And right now, I'm starting a new project
on the north shore of Hawaii and the south
side of Dallas where I'm looking at some
projects that incorporate ecological and
cultural restoration.
So, in terms of academic writing, I'm
already doing some of the prep for that
writing, even though the actual writing up
of my results from this research is years
away.
I'm starting to think about the questions,

formulate hypothesis.
And I'm already into the literature to see
who's done this kind of work already.
When we think of writing in the natural
sciences, probably the first thing that
comes to mind are lab reports.
Writing up the results of an experiment or
an observation study that we've done.
And to be sure, most of the writing focus
and writing time that I spend, and many
natural scientists spend, is on this form
of writing.
Reporting our research results.
These research results are peer-reviewed
through a process I'll talk about in a few
minutes extensively.
We also spend quite a bit of our time
writing grant proposals to get money to
fund the, the research.
So, these two types of writing could be
considered academic writing in the natural
sciences.
Many scientists also participate in
research translation.
This is the idea of taking your results
out to a broader audience.
And so, some of us spend time writing
things like policy memos, Op-Eds and
blogging, and we'll talk more about this
when we talk about writing for the public
in a few weeks.
Academic writing takes a very standardized
form in the natural sciences.
The shorthand for this is the IMRaD.
This is the sections of a scientific
paper, which would be the introduction,
methods, results, and discussion.
This is very similar to the format used in
many social science papers or academic
writing as well, and it's fairly
straightforward to know what goes in each
section.
A very important thing to note about
academic grading in the natural sciences
is that the evidence that we use is data,
the results of our research, the results
of our study.
And we put this data into context by doing
an extensive literature review.
This literature review takes place in the
introductory phases of our research when
we are trying to figure out what has
everybody else found out, what has come
before us.
And then, as we try to put our results in
context, there's a whole another phase of
literature review to try to connect our
results to what has come before.
The methods section is my favorite to
write, and a lot of people's favorite to

write because it's very straightforward.

It's a recipe.
Directions for how we did our research so
that somebody else could repeat it.
The results section is also easy to write
in one hand and difficult in another.
The results section is really all about
the results, reporting the facts and not
doing any of the interpretation of those
results.
That interpretation takes place in the
discussion and the conclusion sections.
Again, the arguments are supported by
evidence in academic writing that is data
related, and we tend not to stray very
much from what our data is telling us.
So, the interpretation that we do of our
results the conclusions that we draw from
our results are not very far ranging.
We tend to be very conservative in
interpreting our results, and this is
partly due to the peer review process
which is very challenging in the natural
sciences.
Where our colleges are evaluating our
work, everything from how we situate our
work within the larger conversation.
How we've asked our questions, the methods
we've used, the analysis and the results
that we have obtained.
So science tends to be criticized for
moving forward at, sort of, a snail's
pace.
And this is partly due to our conservatism
in the way that we interpret our results.
The best way to learn about academic
writing in the natural sciences is to go
ahead and look at some of the papers that
have been published in open-access
journals.
If you have an interest in biosciences, in
ecology, in physics, you will be able to
find several papers published, several
journals published in, in the open-access
realm.
Ask yourself a couple of questions.
How can I tell if this paper has been
peer-reviewed?
There are many ways to find this
information out.
Usually, the journal information area will
tell you that it a little bit about the
peer-review process.
Also, look to see what sources are cited
within the paper.
Can you get a good sense of the literature
that this particular paper builds upon?
And finally, it's interesting to see what
papers have cited the, the work since it
was published.

This is a really interesting way to see

the contributions that, of this particular
paper, which may be sort of a very
specific contribution to the conversation,
to see how that contribution has been
built on in subsequent research projects.
There's a great website out there for you
to learn more about the specifics of the
writing process, and some ideas for, for
writing these particular sections.
And you can find it here at this link.
I recommend you also check that out.
Thanks.
Have a good day.