Sunday, January 31, 2016

PB2A

            Searching for scholarly articles is something that I have not been as familiar with in past years. I remember starting this research process through databases as early as middle school! In my recent academic career I have not had a reason to look through these databases but this assignment interested me. I chose an article titled “Nonmedical Use of Prescription Medication Among Adolescents Using Drugs in Quebec” provided by CanJPsychiatry for the purposes of illustrating the conventions of an academic scholarly article. This article is a great example of correct academic writing and the topic also produces very interesting information.
            This scholarly discusses the prevalence of nonmedical use of prescription drugs among adolescents in Quebec. There are several elements in the piece that are conventions of scholarly writing. One convention in specific is the use of acronyms. Many scholarly articles have to use long terms that need to be shortened. In order to shorten these frequently used terms, writers use acronyms in place. For example, this article defines nonmedical use of prescription medication as “NMUPUM”(556). This use of acronym helps make writing more concise by shortening the amount of words necessary and is extremely common in this type of writing. Accompanying these acronyms is a key that defines each to make the paper easier to read. An additional convention associated with academic writing is avoiding the use of emotional language. Emotional language is words used to portray a certain feeling or in some cases to sway an argument. Because academic writing is purposed to share information, often from research studies, the writing must come from a reporting standpoint and therefore must not elicit an emotional response. The writing is often used to state facts, so for example, the writer explains that the goal of the research is to demonstrate “that among adolescents who reported using at least one drug in the past year, NMUPM is associated with possibly problematic co-use of alcohol or several illicit drugs during the same period” (560).  This writing shows no emotion and instead shares the facts that were found in this research study. This style of non-emotional writing is common to scholarly articles. The set-up of scholarly articles themselves is also specific to the genre. Headings for each section are provided to give a general idea of what information will be shared. For this paper, the set-up consists of background information, results, and then discussion. These headings prepare the reader to know where the paper is heading. These sections make the article easy to follow and keep the research well organized. These conventions help make up the genre of scholarly articles and together, they set this genre apart from others.
            Understanding part 2 of this prompt was easier than expected with the headings for each section of the article. The purpose of the writing itself was to answer the question of what the prevalence and factors associated with nonmedical use of prescription drugs among adolescents who use drugs in Quebec. In other words, researchers are trying to learn about the health and well being of young people in Quebec and what factors are associated with their drug use. In order to come to conclusions to answer their questions, several tests were conducted. These tests helped test different factors that researchers believed could lead to information that could help answer questions about this phenomenon of drug use with adolescents in Quebec. This information for part 2 was found effortlessly because of the structure of the writing. To answer the last question, I believe the data and discussion sections were the most important to the paper. Without any evidence, no argument can be valid. The data section discussed the findings of the research studies that took place and helped give valid information that would help them answer their questions. The discussion section then analyzed and interpreted the data to help readers understand how they came to conclusions and how this data helped contribute to their knowledge. Without these two sections, the paper would have no relevance and everything that the writers argued would have no purpose.

            I really enjoyed reading this scholarly article. I liked how the headings and separation of the material were formatted. The paper flowed well and was very understandable for me as a reader who knew nothing about the topic. I hope that we work more with this type of writing!

Works Cited
Roy, Elise, Marc-Antoine Nolin, and Issouf Traore. "Nonmedical Use of Prescription Medication
       Among Adolescents Using Drugs in Quebec." Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 60.12 (2015):
       556-63. UCSB. Web. 31 Jan. 2016. 

2 comments:

  1. Jessica!

    I thought that the way you structured your PB2A was very clear and concise, while doing a great job of thoroughly answering the prompts. You were able to pull some obvious, as well as less obvious, conventions of scholastic articles, but the one I found most interesting was the usage of acronyms in this genre of writing. That wasn’t something that I had thought of with my own paper, but as I was reading about it in yours I realized that you had a great point in recognizing it as a convention. You also were very successful, I thought, in drawing out the key points of the paper, as it is very understandable to see the results and data as the most important as if you did not have those you would not have shown the findings of your research. Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jessicaaaaa,

    I really like the whole structure of this project boiler; it makes it very easy to read and understand the flow of ides that you had. I really liked that you picked up as a convention the use of acronyms. After reading that, I realized that my own article had a lot of acronyms as well which was interesting to me. It was cool that you talked about each specific study done and why they were done. It shows what the purpose of the article was in the first place. Also, you did a good job of pulling direct evidence in the article to support your claims and strengthen your argument- definitely not always easy! Very good project builder to get ready for WP2. Sweet job! :)

    -Ryan

    ReplyDelete