Hi everyone,
Our first meeting at the new time will be this Friday. We will continue to discuss the organization of this quarter. Dr. Mazer will be in attendance; I will not due to a prior doctor's appointment. I'm attaching three papers. Burd 2001 is for discussion, NOT this week but the following (12 October 2012). I've attached the other two (Fausto and Alarcon) since, as some of you may recall, we've already read and discussed them as a group this summer and you may want to refresh your memory.
I typically think about a paper that I'm reading in terms of how I would write the abstract/summary. If you can write an abstract or at least have the bits and pieces clear in your own mind, then you should be prepped for an oral discussion in a supportive group environment. I've found a few thoughts (by someone else) that might help clarify what an abstract, and therefore discussion, might entail.
An abstract summarizes, in one paragraph (usually), the major aspects of the entire paper in the following prescribed sequence:
- the question(s) you investigated (or purpose), (from Introduction)
- state the purpose very clearly
- the experimental design and methods used, (from Methods)
- clearly express the basic design of the study.
- Name or briefly describe the basic methodology used without going into excessive detail-be sure to indicate the key techniques used.
- the major findings including key quantitative results, or trends (from Results)
- report those results which answer the questions you were asking
- identify trends, relative change or differences, etc.
- a brief summary of your interpetations and conclusions. (from Discussion)
- clearly state the implications of the answers your results gave you.