The same theme has been discussed several times before, with different emphasis.This time it is based on my recent English (including SCI/SSCI) experience.My field is mainly library and information and information science.
The article topic should be chosen well, not too big, not too small, too big to write, data is not easy to collect, data is more difficult to find.Don't try to solve the problems of the whole industry in one article.It is necessary to design experiments or other methods to collect sample data or use open data sets, and to use mathematical methods to organize and analyse conclusions.
English papers are mostly empirical articles. Try not to write about building buildings out of thin air and lack theoretical support.In general, if you are not Einstein, especially a student or scholar, do not build, but if you think you are Einstein or can become Einstein, you encourage bold innovation, even though building, of course, is likely to be rejected.
Hypotheses or problem statements should be concise, clear-cut and do not attempt to solve multiple problems or two problems that are not very relevant.For example, suppose that an innovative teaching method can improve students' learning ability, then suppose that the innovative method can improve students' learning ability and determine which indicators are indicators of learning ability.But the ability to learn has improved, is it certain to ensure students' satisfaction with the teacher's teaching?The two problems are not very related, and the indicators are not the same, so don't draw a snake, say that the students' ability has improved, more satisfied with the teacher's teaching, do not try to solve two unrelated problems.
I read an article saying that China and Japan are both Confucian cultures, so we can learn from each other in a certain way. Let alone whether there is any connection or logical relationship between Confucian culture and the topics to be discussed.
Organizational narration To be objective, objective narration is to use the views and conclusions of published peer-reviewed articles to organize narration, especially the introduction.Every good introduction is a quote from the classics, which here guide the author's domain knowledge and academic merit by organizing the introduction from the viewpoint and conclusion of the peer-reviewed article.
The lines describe how to use passive tone, avoid using subject and how we design experiments to collect and process data, but how experiments are collected and processed.Note the grammatical tenses of writing, generally using the past tense to describe the design, results, discussions, and conclusions of research methods.
This article must have some theories, concepts, frameworks, or best practices as the theoretical foundation. It should link these theories, concepts, frameworks, or best practices and their own research topics seamlessly.Quantitative analysis is needed to avoid qualitative analysis of pure crushing.
Research methods must be clear, logical, feasible, and theoretical, rather than self-created, and can be repeatedly verified by others.
In the case of empirical research, make it clear.
It is advisable to have mathematical statistical methods to analyse the data to produce results to illustrate supporting assumptions or not.
Note that this section discusses the limitations of this study, in particular limitations on research methods and data acquisition.The summary chapter is concise and describes the next research plan.
Other aspects of my previous articles have been discussed, this time is brainstorming, there is a certain amount of repetition, but feel the need to summarize the lessons and experiences.This article is not necessarily completely correct, inappropriate, please criticize and correct.