How to recognize good academic writing: Indeed, the research topic is the first aspect that makes a scientific article attractive in the eyes of other researchers. Still, good writing can value even more research on an already relevant topic – just as impoverished writing or the wrong tone can have the opposite effect. The following are examples of ways to write that indicate good academic writing.
1) Focus on the audience
The first point in identifying good academic writing – and, indeed, good writing in general – is the attention the text pays to understand its readers. A scientific article must, at the outset, contextualize the research so that the reader knows its objectives, what hypothesis it starts from, and in what theoretical framework it is supported. In this sense, the researcher should never assume that his reader will deduce certain aspects but rather make sure that the main points of his argument are clear. Clarity, however, should not be confused with excessive redundancy or didacticism to not compromise the quality of the text or reading. It is important to locate the reader about the research context and what he should expect from it. We have admitted that a good assignment requires a lot of hard work. Academic writing help Birmingham is easing the worries of people like them
2) Coherent context
Just as important as placing the reader in the research context is to present this context coherently so that the reader does not get lost. For this, the researcher must build and present the research steps in a framework of logical progression of ideas, connecting facts, events, and questions so that the complexity of reasoning gradually deepens. The reader must be able to follow the path taken by the research, where the researcher started, and where he intends to arrive after covering a certain path. As stated in the previous topic, the researcher must start from the premise that the reader is unaware of their premises and research path, positioning their arguments to guide their reader through this process.
3) Appropriate language
In addition to knowing how to use the jargon of his research area and writing with the formality that the academy demands, the researcher must also be careful in presenting his conclusions and findings. This is because scientific work can always be expanded or revised, presenting conclusions that contradict previous studies or present new angles on the issue. Therefore, presenting statements in a very definitive or emphatic tone is not appropriate. The statements must always be well-founded and present the path that made them possible. Such caution is even more indicated in research of a more innovative nature, whose conclusions still need to be confronted and better attested so that they become widely accepted. How to recognize good academic writing
One way to assess a more appropriate tone for the presentation of your conclusions and research results is to invest in phrases such as: “the evidence suggests that…”; or “the data collected allows us to infer”; and other examples of writing of a similar tone, which leave room for replicas and discoveries. You, as a researcher, must emphasize the relevance of your work and support the conclusions you have reached. Still, it is always important to avoid the tone that your findings are definitive, which would almost be scientific nonsense.
4) Quality must override quantity
Researchers who read your work will be interested in the details of your research process and the results of the presented study. For this reason, good academic writing must clearly and logically present its research context and relevant results; however, it is essential to balance these two aspects in your text. Your readers will be less interested in being impressed by an impeccable description of your research process if the results presented seem to them to be unimportant or ill-founded. The combination of the excess description of the process and little reasoning of the results can even have the opposite effect of the desired clarity and confuse the reader as to the relevance of the research.