The Science and Art of Science Writing

[Morgan Davis]

I found this article interesting and also a little different than the other articles we have had to read over this semester. I enjoyed how this one was more on a personal story that then related to a lesson rather than trying to teach or explain something to us. While this article did describe the differences about science writing from others, it wasn’t directly teaching us.

The author Michelle did a great job explaining science writers and how they differentiate from other writers and even scientists. Her tone is very informative and helped the reader understand what she was talking about by going in chronological order of her story. I found it interesting how in the moment she saw the scientist circling the rattlesnake was when she started thinking about how everyone was driven to this career by many things but mainly their curiosity. After she describes her story she then goes into discussing science writing. In the article she states “ Most of us have dabbled a bit in science ourselves, but we’re more or less professional amateurs, best at explaining complicated things with both maximum simplicity and maximum accuracy” (Nijhuis). I found this quote interesting and also kind of funny. They way she describes herself and others like her as “professional amateurs” made me as a reader think differently about science writers and the writing itself.

She also relates science writing to other styles of writing, I personally have not read or know of the other pieces she mentioned, so I was unable to see the connection the author was trying to say but I do understand how science writing, if done correctly, can be turned into just good writing that many people will understand. Her audience isn’t very directed to one certain type of reader, I believe anyone can read her piece but it could however be directed to people more interested in science to be able to actually relate to her story and purpose.

Overall I did enjoy this reading because it was more interesting than other pieces we have read over the semester. The author kept it interesting by talking about the rattlesnake and how it made her wonder about other scientists and eventually discuss the science writing.

[Kira Schwartz]

I agree that this article was very different yet intriguing. It started off with a personal story and linked to the topic. It created a bigger picture of science writing through the author’s personal story. It taught us through an antidote and was not too lengthy, keeping the reader engaged.

I liked how in science writing, Nijhuis says how science makes us human. Dr. Watson from Sherlock Holmes says how we keep asking questions and the world intrigues us. Her story shows how she keeps being elated and intrigued by the world, just as science and the writing of science envelopes scientists.

I think her audience was for those interested in English and science writers. It was for people who write and those who want to write various genres. Those interested in science also would enjoy this piece because they can relate to it.

Overall I liked the length and narration of this article. It got to the point in an interesting way and drew the reader in.

[Danielle Ferriola]

I agree that this article was different than all of the other articles we have read this semester. I found the topic interesting because I am a science person, and I can relate to it. I like how the author uses the example of the scientists spending their days searching for different animals, how they get so excited over finding one. I agree that scientific writing is about curiosity. All of the scientific articles that I have read have been about experiments, and people trying to figure out something new or prove a theory. I feel like there is a lot more to say about scientific articles. This article is just speaking of scientific articles in general. It does not go in depth about the different kinds of articles like lab reports. I wish it did go a little more in depth about the different types of scientific writing to really show how it is different from other types of writing.

Overall, I thought the article was informative, but also relatable to the audience. The audience for this article was probably high school students or freshman college students. It is not a difficult read; it is just the basics of scientific writing. I think the author did a good job explaining what scientific writing is. I think everyone can relate to scientific writing because we have all made observations and have been curious about something. We also have all read or heard about scientific writing like in the news or online. It is all around us. I do agree with Morgan on how people who enjoy science would like this article more than a regular person. They could probably relate more to the examples that the author made.

I have not heard of the references she made either, but I have read enough scientific articles to know what she was talking about. Overall, I enjoyed the article. I don’t see how it relates to what we are doing in class right now. Maybe how we were observing our specific communities, but I think we are analyzing the data differently. I think scientific writing focuses on different things than our ethnographies are focusing on. I am not really sure though.

[Ashley Caramanna]

When I first opened the reading I was really happy that it was only four pages long. I thought that being on break there would be a lot of reading to do before class, and I was happy that that was not the case. As I was reading through the reading I found it pretty interesting. I had thought about this somewhat fitting into my major which is psychology. Psychology is a science so when I saw the title it had interested me in reading more into it. I like that this was in a short story form. It was short and sweet and kind of right to the point. The thing I did not like about this reading was it in my opinion is not very helpful for what we are currently doing in class. I feel like maybe it could have been more an informational type of reading rather than a short story. The reason why I say that is because reading through first drafts I found that some struggled with that was asked to be done for this topic. Even though I liked the personal short story I do not think it was much help for people who are struggling with writing the second paper. If the author had gone into more depth about science writing then this would have been an excellent piece of literature to help us with this paper. But overall I liked the story that the author had told. It was a personal story which was nice since it was something different that we read so far this semester. The only thing that I did not like was the fact that it did not have much detail in how to actually write a science type paper. I think maybe it should be discussed more in class how to actually write a science type paper so that everyone knows what is expected at the end of this assignment. If anything maybe a different reading so that it is more clear on what science writing actually is for some who are not quite sure.

[Rory Langan]

This article was interesting and it related very well to what one part of this class’s purpose is, which is to help us understand how we should write in our disciplines. This article explained why knowing how to write in your discipline is important. I am a science person myself and I do relate to the article because I have a lot of curiosity and the article says that the writers and the scientists that they accompany are driven by their curiosity.

I believe that science writers play an important role in our society. Science denial and science ignorance are a huge problem and one of the ways they can be addressed is through more understanding. Many people nowadays do not seem to care for facts, science, and reason. There is a war on facts in the government, and in the public. What our society has to do now is fight that war on the side of science and reason because science and reason are how we have survived for so long and how we have resolved so many complicated issues. As this article states, science writers explain complicated scientific discoveries, innovations, and experiments in simpler terms and they bring a wider understanding to millions of people. That is what we need to fight the war on science.

As I aforementioned, curiosity is an important part of science and, in my opinion, it should be a part of everybody’s everyday lives. Curiosity is an antidote of close-mindedness. There are too many close-minded people in the world and that is not only contributing to the war on science, facts, and reason, but it also is slowing down America’s progress in the world stage. I have respect for writers like Michelle Nijuis because they have more of a noble purpose to their writing. I also have respect for her when she says that science writers are hardly experts in science and any related fields that they may cover in their books.

To add on to the war on facts, there are many instances of people, who are not scientists, saying, “I’m not a scientist, but. . . . .”. They then go on to discuss their own opinion about different issues that are discovered through or somehow relate to science. The minute they say that they are not a scientist, they lose credibility especially if they go against what the majority of scientists have found to be true. I liked this article and I agree with what Morgan said, how the article is more like a story than an essay. All in all, it was an enjoyable, interesting, and informative read.

[Brittany Riha]

I liked this reading right from the beginning. It was very interesting and it kept my attention throughout the whole thing. Along with Ashley, I am a psychology major as well and I think that’s what helps me relate to this article a little more. I enjoyed how the reading was based on a personal event and she was telling a short story about her, her career, and her coworkers. She goes on to talk about science writing and she says that it is the most human of disciplines. Science is all about curiosity and it’s more of a search about something, always wanting to find out more data or information. I thought it was a cool thing when the author separates the biologists from the rattlesnake and she was more focused on her coworkers and how fascinating they all were. Overall, I thought this was a great piece to read and the length of it was a plus for me because it got right to the point. Again, I like how it was based on a personal experience which can help the readers relate and base it off of something they’ve been through themselves. I believe that there is so much more to science than just an experiment. Science is all about being researchers and wanting to explore more, or finding out a reason to why things happen the way they do. I think this reading can be very relatable for almost any type of audience especially biology majors or anyone related to the science field. I think she did a great job explaining to the audience what scientific writing is all about and I like that she targets her point right away.

[Alex Colie]

I thought Michelle Nijhuis did an excellent job with her article “ The Science and Art of Science Writing”. I overall really enjoyed reading this article it was interesting and kept my attention, the way she used a story and used it to explain what scientific writing is was very helpful. In my opinion without the story aspect really helped support what Nijhuis was saying and without I think the article wouldn’t be as interesting or easy to understand.

It’s interesting the way she explained who science writers really are, by saying that they are “seldom experts in the fields they write about” which kind of makes us all in some way a science writer as students. We are all learning new things and often times have to apply them in writing. We all are constantly making observation and have curiosity even in the smallest ways.

Overall this article was very interesting and a nice read coming back from break. Nijhuis really opened my mind to science writing, which has not been a large aspect in my life especially because my major is not science related.

[Matt Hoyt]

I was surprised how much I enjoyed this reading, as I really never enjoyed science writing before as I’ve always preferred history over science. However, I thought that Michelle Nijhuis did a phenomenal job with her writing as it was interesting for both those who are familiar with science and those who are not. Her style of more storytelling helped with explaining what scientific writing is. The article kept my attention more so than I thought it would and was a great reading to star with after break.

The point that she made that I thought was the most interesting is similar to the other people in our class where she discusses how no science writers are not truly experts in the field they write about. It took me back for a moment, think how someone could professionally write about a science field and not be an expert, but as I read it and it I saw how that all of us are scientific writers in a way. While I am not a major in the sciences, I found this article helpful for my future as many of the principles she stated about curiosity is something we all could use, especially for papers similar to the one we are writing now.

[Alyssa MacLeod]

I love how she starts off this article. It is interesting and grabs my attention right away. By saying “I blame a rattlesnake for my career”, I don’t see how the reader would not want to keep reading and learn what she is talking about. I really like her style of writing. It makes it enjoyable for the reader. Like Morgan said it is reading a personal story which is different from what we have been reading this year. Though it was a personal story, it still seemed informative.
She uses a lot of descriptive detailing. I felt like I could picture it and feel like I was there as well. Once she said that the people around the snake were really fascinating her, I initially thought she must be an ethnographer.

When I think of science writing, I like of something boring that would not interest me at all. This piece on the other hand makes science seem so much more interesting and relatable. I really like how she said the writing “best at expelling complicated things with maximum simplicity and maximum accuracy.” Science writing makes me think of the opposite. All the science pieces I have read are really hard to understand but she says that is not how it should be.

I love how she ends this piece bringing it back to the night in Arizona. This is something I picked up on from a different author and like to incorporate it into my writing as well. Overall, this piece was well written and enjoyable to read.

[Sarah Junod]

I really liked how it started off with her personal story of her career. It was eye catching and fun to read. She talks about her experiences in an informal way. I am not personally a fan of science, but she makes science sound fun.

I liked how she referred to different texts, like Sherlock Holmes, or the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. This also participated in keeping my attention. I enjoyed the style of story telling, or narrating that she used.

The way she described science was interesting. She said that “science, after all, is a quest, and as such it’s one of the oldest and most enduring stories we have”. In that specific paragraph, she describes science in a fascinating way. For example, she writes, “perhaps most of all, it’s about women and men possessed by curiosity, people who devote their lives to pursuits the rest of us mystifying or terrifying-chasing viruses, finding undiscovered plants, dusting off dinosaurs or teasing venomous snakes”.

[Mikhaila Douglas]

After reading this mini article I was very satisfied with the whole thing. I enjoyed that there wasn’t so much reading to do and the way the author explained the art of science. Most of the science articles that I see are based off of research and new experiments that people are trying. This article has explained science differently. Although I’m not a fan of science this article was interesting.

[Evonne Scott]

I really enjoyed reading this article because I am an intended science major and found this very useful and informative. I feel you personally have a better connection and understanding of something when you are interested in the topic and in this case, I naturally love science so this article may have been more interesting a to me than maybe someone with other interests. In reply to Danielle,I think this article actually relates to what we are learning.I think maybe this article was to compare the difference of quantitative vs qualitative data which we are doing for this class in our empirical research paper. I believe it is important, at least for me, to be aware of different types of observations and research that can be used in different situations. We all had to recently do research on our specific communities and I liked comparing it to how scientist do their research.

Scientist have a different style of writing which is more straight forward and to the point unlike other genres of literature, and I think that played a role in why this article was one of the shortest ones we read. The reading mentioned how science writers are experts in the field they talk about, which I found to be very important. That also can be referenced back to the beginning of the course when we were learning about discourse and how one must be an expert in order to fully be a member of a particular discourse.

Overall I really enjoyed this article and it made me interested in reading more science writings and articles on my own time to help better my knowledge for my major.

[Author]

Posts