As a freshman, I have not had as much experience analyzing scientific articles or other types of scientific literature as most of the students in the class. After reading Dr. Schwartz’s “Food Matters” (a section from his book The Genie in the Bottle) and Potts and Churchwell’s “Removal of Radionuclides in Wastewater Utilizing Potassium Ferrate(VI), I began to realize how certain literature, even in the field of science, can have vastly different audiences. Writing in light of one’s audience results with differences in the technicality, the formality, and many other aspects of the work.
After reading the article “Anthocyanin antioxidants from edible fruits” by Einbond, et al., I found myself understanding the general idea of the article, but still lacking solid comprehension of the techniques used for the experiment and analysis. I had to search the internet for definitions and explanations of the various unfamiliar words in the article, but was still left with a fundamental understanding of the information that is summarized in a flow chart explaining the steps of the experiment. When I came to class, I felt that I knew enough about the article to discuss the overarching points and goals of the scientists, but could not follow the technicalities that made this paper unique from another paper explaining the importance of anthocyanin antioxidants. The class began analyzing the article and I found it surprising easy to follow the discussion. As the conversation moved into the more technical details of the article, I found myself finally understanding what I had struggled to comprehend on my own. Now the various phrases, including “concentrate in vacuo” and “Diaion HP20SS eluted with H2O” had more meaning as I began to piece together the steps of the experiment and found the flow of the methodology.
Reading this article in class allowed me to comprehend the article I never thought was possible for readers that are not in that specific field. I found errors in my previous approaches to reading scientific articles and have realized that although it will not become easy overnight, I can practice in order to improve my reading skills in regards to these types of papers. Now, I realize I cannot dwell on the definition of “concentrate” and then “in vacuo” without connecting the two ideas and then taking that phrase and incorporating it into the experiment itself. Although I came into this class with much reservation, I realize that this class is feasible and that I need to change the way I approach an article. It seems like I have relearned how to read all over again. As I improve, there will be a new height of comprehension that will allow me to appreciate the works of scientists in a way that would cause my peers to yawn.
1 comment:
You bring up some very good points in this blog, however, as a senior, I also found some of the articles to be very difficult. I was surprised at the fact that certain words in the article are read over by an individual unfamiliar with the field of study but became the source of a five to ten minute discussion in class after Dr. Norton highlighted it for us. This process celebrates science because the articles are advancements and the subsequent discussion promotes independent study and research, of the vocabulary, and collaboration. It also creates an equal ground for all scientists since both you and I were confused with this article and worked together to understand it.
Post a Comment