To cite this article: Santiago García-Granda (): Writing science: how to chapter is concise and engaging and Professor Joshua Schimel. by. Joshua Schimel. · Rating details · ratings · 38 reviews. As a scientist, you are a professional writer: your career is built on successful proposals and. To be frank, books that emphasise the writing process to sci- entists are cluttered language of the scientist, to those written by scientists, By Joshua Schimel.

Author: Vudole Shamuro
Country: Liechtenstein
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Career
Published (Last): 17 June 2009
Pages: 295
PDF File Size: 15.21 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.82 Mb
ISBN: 691-7-25199-383-7
Downloads: 47179
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Dokree

We were clueless and wrong; Mary was considerate to even check. When you create a new category of people or thingsyou never create only one—you create two: Sciecne the questions are dull or flawed, the proposal is dead and nothing can save it—not a clever experiment and not education and outreach efforts! Across all those, not a single scihmel has ever been accepted outright—not one. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.

By continuing to use this jlsh, you agree to their use. It is your job to be thoughtful, careful, and analytical; it is your job to challenge your ideas and to try to falsify your hypotheses; it is your job to be open and honest about the uncertainties in your data and conclusions. I have learned a great deal from this book. Feb 11, Tom rated it really liked it.

Dec 06, Bruno rated it it was amazing. Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. As a scientist, you are a professional writer. Schimel has some great tips for the scientific writer, but sometimes seems to contradict himself.


Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded by Joshua Schimel

Is the core science sound, interesting, and important enough for this journal? First, remember that the editor likely received two or three external reviews that might have varied in their assessments and recommendations—editors need to synthesize all that input before making a decision and offering guidance to the authors. Then, I include my line-by-line specific comments. It uses that insight to discuss how to write more effectively.

Writing Science

Useful This book provides an excellent set of ideas that can improve any scientist’s writing. Which of these actually get funded becomes a function of the personal dynamics on the review panel and the quirks of the competition.

Author does not just plainly said so, he eloquently “told” his “stor This is not a csience book you read before you go to bed. Leaving out the issue of the dynamics of the abstract is a bit odd, I think, sinc Overall a great book and also in line mostly with my advisor’s thinking on the matter.

So be sensitive to the language and the likelihood of offense. If I choose not to take that advice, it schi,el me the good guy and helps me push the authors to fix the problems: Overall, for the graduate-level student or working scholar who is looking to up their game, this is a good choice. Filed under AcademeLanguage use and abuse.


Book Review: Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded

Diversity in the Scientific Community Donna J. Right now the only funds I have are for a separate desert-focused project.

Consider not just the light shimel cast, but everyone else who will suddenly feel themselves in shadow. Filed under AcademePeer reviewScience.

Book Review: Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded

It may not be obvious to them what you mean—you must explain your thinking and educate them. Parts of this book would be hard to use in the classroom–even in a class where students are doing their own authentic research, asking them to produce an earth-shattering topic for a proposal is hard.

The PIs will see your review, but they are not its audience—the review panel and program officers are. Preview — Writing Science by Joshua Schimel. The source of the “Message Box”, an integral part of Prof. It is the author’s job to make the reader’s job easy. If major elements are likely to fail, or you lack confidence the investigators will be able to solve the problems that arise, you should say so and recommend rejection.