Students often get confused between passive/active sentence structures and the use of personal pronouns (and perhaps lots of us can do too!)  and so use tortuous passive constructions when in fact they can use active sentences in which they are not using personal pronouns! 

Having read closely the scientific writing of post graduate research students, I've become aware of differences in different parts of a research paper or thesis. So where the method is being described then yes, the emphasis is on what was done rather than who did it and therefore there might be a lot of passive but then in reporting results, sentences are active, e.g. the levels of so and so were higher then....unless you choose to say the levels of so and so were found to be.... Where you might use a personal pronoun is in talking about the purpose of the research or the key finding or argument when wishing to emphasise ownership of those findings...I guess, echoing someone else, as well as depending on changing practices of different disciplines, journal styles and the relative freedom of more established academics (and good writers!) to flaunt the conventions of their discipline- it also depends on the rhetorical purpose/function of different sections of a text too. 
________________________________________
From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kim Shahabudin [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 04 February 2010 08:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Scientific Writing

Hi Julia,

My view is that getting students to think about what is appropriate is always key in academic writing, whatever the discipline or genre. So I tell them first that the 'never use the 1st person' rule no longer holds, but that they must  always consider what they are communicating (are they reporting on actions from which it would be impossible, nonsensical or undesirable to remove themselves as actor?) and who are they communicating to (what does the reader expect or need to be told?). However, the final word at undergraduate level is still - if in doubt (and they have checked carefully that there are no instructions to the contrary), use the passive voice because that is what the majority of your readers still expect.

This is really a development issue - you need to learn how to communicate objectively before you can judge when it is appropriate to be more personal. I would expect to see more sophisticated consideration and understanding of the writer's personal role in meaning-making in the work of a PhD candidate - so the lovely examples of clever people using the 1st person that other people have quoted aren't necessarily appropriate models for undergrad work!

Kim

________________________________

Dr Kim Shahabudin, Study Adviser & LearnHigher Research Officer
Room 107, Carrington Building, Whiteknights, University of Reading, RG6 6UA| ( 0118 378 4218|
: www.reading.ac.uk/studyadvice : www.learnhigher.ac.uk <http://www.learnhigher.ac.uk/>

________________________________

From: learning development in higher education network on behalf of Julia Braham
Sent: Wed 03/02/2010 16:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Scientific Writing



A colleague has recently been exploring scientific writing resources, looking for information to expand our web pages. One of the books we have come across is John Kirkman's 'Good Style Writing for Science and Technology'.



Kirkman comments on writing style in reports and papers, based on a number of surveys with members of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, the British Ecological Society and the Biochemical Society. In these surveys the majority of respondents voted for direct, active, and judiciously personalised writing, over the 'traditional' passive style. (p2)

Based on these surveys Kirkman suggest that 'an entirely proper orientation for writer(s) to use in reports or scientific papers is I or we (p73).



This conflict of message between objectivity and responsibility message seems to be coming from an increasing number of websites and text books. I am not a scientist and rely on other sources of expertise when talking to students about good science writing. I like a lot of what Kirkman says, but am nervous about referring to or advocating his ideas with the science and engineering students writing reports at the University of Leeds.



Has anyone else come across Kirkman's work? Is anyone else suggesting that students could or should move from the traditional to a more personalised form of writing, or should the advice be increasingly context dependant rather than one size fits all?



Kirkman,J., (1992) ' Good Style Writing for Science and Technology' London, E&FN Spon.





Julia Braham

Senior Academic Skills Adviser

Skills@Library

15 Blenheim Terrace

University of Leeds

Leeds LS2 9JT



T  44(0) 113 343 2606

E  [log in to unmask]