Organization of the Technical Report FLOYD 0. SLATE Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
T
HIS paper suggests an outline to be followed in wntmg . . a technical report. It concerns principally the report of an experiment and may have little bearing on other types of technical writing, such as presentations of theories, descriptions of apparatus, book reviews, abstracts, topic reviews, textbooks, and records of patents. The ideal technical report should be accurate, short, concise, straightforward, scientifically sound, and should contain certain essential sections placed in a logical order. The reader should obtain atfirst reading a clear picture of the purpose, the general method of attack, and the over-all conclusions. The organizatiou should be such that he can then readily refer to any section for speciiic details. There is a great diversity of methods of building a technical report and there is a great diversity of purposes in publishing these reports, but unfortunately the method seldom fits the purpose. Perhaps the worst mistake is lack of logical organization; the result of this mistake is that the reader becomes confused and loses the whole perspective of the paper. There is often a haphazard jumble of conclusions, problems, data, purposes, procedures, and discussions. Another serious error is excessive length. Many papers are so filled with undesirable detail and repetitions caused by lack of organization that potential readers, after a glance a t the clock, decide not to tackle them. Some papers omit essential sections, such as a statement of the problem. Data are often presented sloppily by poor graphs, or by a strange, unrelated mixtures of tables, figures, and general word descriptions. Technical report writing can be improved by variaus means. I t is essential that the potential writer know how to think and plan logically. He should be adeI. 11.
111.
IV.
V.
VI.
quately trained in grammar and composition. Then he should study the technique of writing technical reports and, after this, practice writing extensively. He should carefully analyze the nature of his reader and, if the report is to appear in print, the policy and purposes of the journal in which i t will be published. He should list the essential ideas, arrange them in a logical order, then write the text in detail. It is excellent practice to have both the outline and the final report checked by persons acquainted with the subject. Above is given an outline which can be used as a guide for most reports of experiments. I t contains all the essential sections, arranged in such a manner that the reader can follow the sequence of ideas readily. For some purposes, pzgt of the sections may be short or omitted entirely, and rearrangement may be desirable. It is emphasized that a writer should not draft his reports by following this outline step by step, as though writing according to a mathematical formula, for dry uninteresting papers may result if all personal initiative of the writer is denied. This outline is meant to be a guide, not a formula. The summary usually serves one of two purposes: readers who are interested generally, but not specifically may read only this section; and it serves to fix the sequence of the paper in the mind of the reader of the complete paper. It should state the problem, give the essence of the experimental work, and generalize the important conclusions. I n the introduction, the statemat of problem must be specific. The haziness, or even the complete lack, of this statement is probably the most common and most serious error in technical writing. I t serves to emphasize the purpose of the paper to the reader and to prepare him for what is to follow. The analysis of problem explains why the problem Summary exists and tells what advantages its solution will preIntroduction sent. This analysis is flexible and may contain much A. Statement of problem necessary descriptive and background material. B. Analysis of problem C. Review of previous work The raim of previous work may be omitted in many D. Approach used in this work articles; in some it has no place a t all. It is, however, Experimental work generally desirable to refer to basic references on the A. Apparatus and equipment subject in question. It is often good practice to list a B. Materials and reagents C. Procedure fairly comprehensive bibliography and occasionally to D. Data report an exbaustive literature search. The decision Discussion of what to include is best made by studying carefully A. Thcoretical background the purpose of publishing the paper. B. Obscure and involved parts of experimental work The approach used i n this work may be omitted in C. Meaning of data D. Errors (known and possible) very short papers, but usually a brief statement describE. Deficiencies of the work ing the perspective of the experimental work section F. Suggested further study makes the latter much easier to understand. Conclusions The section labeled experimental work is the one best References 439
written in m3st articles. It should be written so that a rors in the d a t a s h o u l d be discussed next. These worker skilled in the art can repeat the work and obtain should include deficiencies of perspective, of attack, and the same results by following the procedure given by of completeness. If a writer does not acknowledge the author. Apparatus and equipment can often be these things, others will point them out for him-to his described to advantage by photographs and drawings. embarrassment. The general nature, the methods of preparation, and Lines of future sfudy on the problem in question may the purity of materials and reagents should be described or may not be pointed out, but if these plans for future carefully. Many procedures are discussed in such un- work are derived directly from the study, such suggesnecessary detail that much space is wasted, although tions or proposals are in order and may be helpful to other workers. some omit essential steps. The conclusions are the most important part of the The presentation of data involves many difficult problems. Results should be given correctly, under- paper. Extreme care must he used, for by drawing the standably, and in sufficient detail to justify the conclu- wrong conclusions the writer can get himself into hot sions. Data may be inserted in the procedure immedi- water, hot and deep. By publishing one paper with ately following the description of the experimentalwork incorrect conclusions, the budding scientist can easily used to obtain them or grouped a t the end of the pro- kill his chances for establishing a reputation. A recogcedure; the better position will depend on the nature nized authority can usually weather the storm caused by one or two bad papers, but even he can fall ignominiand purpose of the paper. The form of the datatables, figures, graphs, and photographs-should be ously. Fist, the conclusions should answer the probcarefully considered. In most cases graphs serve best lem as stated in the introduction. Second, they should to emphasize compluisons and to conserve space. be completely validated by the data given, perhaps supLong, involved tables tend to confuse the reader. plemented by references to other work. Third, they Photogrzphs are almost invariably .better than word should be stated in such a manner that they can be indidescriptions. General graphing practice is so poor that vidually isolated from the body of the paper and still be data are seldom presented to advantage. The title of valid, for that is just what may happen to them in rethe figure should describe its contents; the axes should views, abstracts, and discussions. References may be inserted in the text, given as footbe labeled completely, with units given; grid lines should be used, but not so thickly as to cause confusion; notes, or listed a t the end of the paper. The last points should be used on the curves unless the data are method is usually used and is usually preferable, for in continuous; the curves should be heavier than the grid this manner it serves best as a guide to workers interlines; and the abscissa should be used for the independ- ested in using it to make a comprehensive study of the ent variable. subject. The references may be listed chronologically The discussion is the most difficult part of a paper to by subject, or alphabetically by author. The last write. Careful judgment must be exercised in its method is generally accepted, but others may serve best length, for a discussion can easily become excessively for special cases. A standard method of giving referlong. The theoretical background can usually he eilces (see Chemical Abstracts for chemical writing) short, and mathematics can be used to advantage if ap- should he strictly followed to avoid confusion and errors plicable. References are often essential at this point. in "interpretation." The first and foremost requirement of all technical Obscure and involered parts of the procedure are best discussed in this section, this being preferable to break- reports is accuracy. Proofreading by several persons is ing the continuity of the procedure itself. Many papers helpful in reducing the number of errors in numerals, spelling, and grammar. The author must carefully will not require this part of the discussion at all. The mezning of the data is a most important topic. guard against weakness in organization, coherence, and I t serves to bridge the gap between the conclusions and perspective. The repxt must be understandable the naked data. I t explains exactly how the data must convey the author's ideas to the reader. Careful fit the problem. organization and careful writing will take care of this. The errors always present in experimental work are Because of the immense volume of technical literature, completely ignored by many--even most-authors. A it is desirable that reports be as brief as possible. This large percentage of papers are nearly worthless because requirement may sometimes demand extreme brevity, there is no indication of the accuracy and precision of or even omission, of some of the sections in the outline the data, and repetitioh of the work is thus necessitated. suggested above; but continuity is important, and adeNot only the known errors or limits of accuracy, but also quate statements of problem, data, and conclusions possible errors, should always be discussed, or a t least must never be sacriiied. By proper training of writers, mentioned. Any scientist who flagrantly omits all by use of logic and organization, and by care in writing, mention of his errors is leaving himself wide open to technical reports can be transformed from a jungle of adverse criticism. facts, figures, and fumblings to papers that reflect the Defcciencies of the work-deficiencies apart from er- scientific method used by their authors.
