I'd like to begin our examination of scientific writing by giving you each the opportunity to define what you think good writing in one particular science is.
Begin by finding one passage--a page or substantial paragraph long--in a piece written and published for a professional scientific audience. Quote the passage and describe the context of its publication for us, in other words who reads this piece, when it was first read and why it might be striking in its field. Give us as much background as you think we'll need to understand the special concerns of the particular scientific community whom the piece was written to inform.
Then analyze the piece by describing for us exactly why you think it is a successful piece of science writing. What about the piece sounds scientific to you? How does it fulfill whatever expectations you've been taught to bring to reading in the sciences? How does it fit your personal definition of scientific writing (if indeed it does)?
Finally compare your passage to whatever style manual you may have been taught to expect that writing in its field will follow. You might look at one aspect of your passage and how it does or does not follow the advice of the style manual favored by writers in it field.
This paper is due as a Word attachment to an email message sent to Jan.Cooper@oberlin.edu by 3 PM Sunday, February 13. In your email message please include a note to me telling me: 1) how satisfied you are with this piece of writing and 2) what, if anything you think you could do to improve the piece.
I look forward to reading your examinations.