The Science Of Scientific Writing    Set 6     Set 6-Basis boxes Second pageThird pageExampleExercise 1Exercise 2Exercise 3Exercise 4-Quiz 1Fourth page Exercise 5-Quiz 2Writing about EvidenceExercise 6Arguments and Explanations Final page Set 6.

Course Home

OVERVIEW: The way to well-written science

How to do the Course


PART I: Paragraphs and Sentences

SET A: Paragraphs: The Maps Behind Them

SET B: Paragraphs: Using Maps to Meet Readers' Expectations

SET C: Paragraphs with Something Extra: Points and Tails

SET D: The Generic Section: Expectations and Maps as Blueprints

SET E: Scientific Sections: The Methods and Results

SET F: Scientific Sections: The Discussion

SET G : Scientific Sections: The Introduction

SET H : Sentences

SET I : The Paper as a Whole



PART II: The Paper and its Sections


SET 1: Argument Parts

SET 2: Indicator Words

SET 3: Refining Claims

SET 4: Locating Arguments in Prose

SET 5: Rationale's Essay Planner

SET 6: Evidence in Arguments: Basis Boxes

SET 7: Assessing

SET 8: More on Assessing

SET 9: Analysis Maps

SET 10: Assessing Again

Synthesis 1: Position-Early Paragraphs

Synthesis 2: Position-Final Paragraphs

Synthesis 3: Writing a Discussion I

Synthesis 4: Writing a Discussion II

So you now know the different types of evidence that can be put to use in providing externally verfiable sources for your argument. But now we must also think about the quality of evidence. There is some overlap with evidence type here - a publication might be considered overall to be stronger than an assertion. B but the differences in quality within a type of evidence can be sufficient to make such generalisations impossible. Some publications, for example, have such poor production standards that anything drawn from them would provide evidence of only the most dubious kind. We could say an an argument based on porr evidence is like a house that does rest upon bedrock, but a rocky layer that is highly unstable.

Let's reflect more upon the quality of evidence.

Some sources provide sound support for a claim:



Other sources provide only shaky support for a claim.  They are weak, rather than dubious:


Some sources are unreliable and provide nil support for a claim:

Nil picture



Content of this page drawn in whole or part from the Austhink Rationale Exercises with permission from Austhink.