Frameworks

WHY are frameworks important? Strong frameworks can contribute both to learning and to effective communication.

Why do we write? Of course, we write to communicate with other people. Therefore, it is helpful to think about what we mean by "communication" in scientific and technical writing. 

The purpose of scientific communication is most often to help other people to understand something in the same way that we understand it. Therefore, one place to start thinking about communication is to consider what it means for us to understand something ourselves.

What, then, is understanding? Understanding is more than simply memorizing pieces of information like facts or events (Bloom et al., 1956). Understanding involves making connections among elements of information, so that each element of information has context and meaning because of its relationships to other things. We will soon discuss some of the ways that things can be related to each other. For example, information can be related chronologically, hierarchically, or as a part of reasoned arguments. For now, we can notice that stating that we "understand" something means that we can place that thing in relation to other things, by identifying how all the elements are connected together.

In short, we have a mental structure, or a "framework," that connects what we know together in useful ways. The concept of "frameworks" is central to our approach to scientific communication, so let's start with a definition of what a "framework" is.

If we think of understanding as having accurate and useful frameworks to connect elements of information (assumptions, facts, rules, general concepts, etc.) together, then a natural question is: where do frameworks come from?

Frameworks exist in our own minds. Therefore, if we think about it, there's really only one place that most frameworks can come from. We have to BUILD our frameworks ourselves. 

Learning to understand new things can be thought of as constructing new frameworks. Constructing new frameworks can involve learning new connections among things that we already know (for example, did you know that kale, cabbage, broccoli, Brussels sprouts and cauliflower are all variants of the same species of plant?). However, we are often in a position of learning new information, and trying to understand the new things that we learn. 

To construct frameworks with new information, we can think about making two important types of connections. 

First, it is helpful if we know how new elements of information are connected to each other. Are we learning about things that are elements of some larger whole, or alternatives to each other, similar or different in some respect? Learning the connections can help us build a framework to organize the elements, divide them up into manageable chunks, and remember the new information.

Second, if we wish to be able to remember and access the new information that we are learning, we need to connect the new information to things that we already know. 

Therefore, the process of constructing frameworks can be thought of as making connections that put new information into context, by identifying relationships among elements of new information, and relating the new information to our existing frameworks of understanding.

By helping us connect new information to previous knowledge, frameworks help us learn and retain new information (National Research Council. 2000).

If understanding can be thought of as constructing frameworks that connect new information to our existing understanding, how can we think of communication?

We can think of communication as creating representations of our frameworks that are external to us, so that the representations help other people build their OWN frameworks to understand the information we are trying to communicate.

"External" representations can include writing, speaking, graphics, or any other sort of medium. Although these "Reasoned Writing" modules primarily focus on writing, graphical representations can be very useful, and spoken communication is also a critical part of science. 

How can we construct representations of our frameworks that allow other people to construct understanding as accurately and easily as possible, based on their own knowledge, frameworks, and reasoning? Clearly, there are NOT simple, short answers. Effective communication is HARD. However, some principles from our discussion thus far would be helpful to keep in mind:

1) The objective of scientific communication is to represent information in such a way that the audience constructs an understanding that accurately reflects our understanding. Scientific communication is therefore different from other forms of communication (e.g. some forms of poetry, fiction, art, etc.), where a specific interpretation may not be important or even desirable. In scientific writing, we have a specific interpretation in mind, and we seek to help our audience understand our interpretation (of course, understanding our interpretation does NOT prevent the audience from constructing their own interpretation of the information also).

2) It is important to build on information that the audience already knows. However, it is often to difficult or impossible for us, as writers, to know what our audience will know! Therefore, it is important to make as few assumptions as possible about what the audience will know, and to be as specific as possible when using words or any other means to express ideas and information in frameworks.

3) The burden is on US, the authors, to help the audience understand the information that we wish to communicate. It is NOT the reader’s responsibility to intensely study our writing and painstakingly decipher meaning as one would some ancient text. Therefore, it is helpful to create frameworks that are as simple as possible.

In summary, frameworks can help to structure communication between authors and audiences (Booth, 2016). Using a framework to structure communication makes the communication explanatory, instead of solely descriptive. Explanatory communication places information in context, which facilitates understanding and retention (National Research Council. 2000). Frameworks can help us learn for ourselves and also effectively communicate with others, especially when the information that we are trying to communicate is complex and difficult to understand. In short:

Structure is one key to clarity despite complexity.

Many types of frameworks are available. However, not all frameworks are equally strong.

Frameworks can structure ideas in many different ways (Handlesman, 2007). For example, exercises such as creating concept maps, Venn diagrams, or comparing and contrasting ideas all use frameworks to help structure information and contribute to learning  (Handlesman, 2007). Visual representations of frameworks can help to analyze complex problems such as designing scientific experiments. However, not all frameworks are equally useful for organizing thinking and writing. 

Deliberately selecting a specific framework for every aspect of communication can clarify both thinking and writing. Three frameworks that are available to structure writing are: chronological (time-based), lists, and reasoned. 

In summary, chronologies are often the "default" frameworks that we first think of using to structure our communication. Although chronologies are appropriate in situations when time is very important, chronologies are NOT the strongest framework for most types of scientific communication. The heart of most scientific communication is reasoning: using arguments to organize information, and to help audiences construct a specific understanding of evidence. Selecting reasoned frameworks can also be helpful to simplify the writing process. We can simplify the process of constructing arguments by selecting clearly-identified "formal" reasoning frameworks: deductive reasoning (syllogisms) and inductive reasoning. Both deductive and inductive arguments consist of only a few types of distinct elements: primarily conclusions supported by fact-based premises. Clarifications can help explain premises, but clarifications are NOT evidence themselves (and are therefore used sparingly). Each statement or section of writing should be easily-identifiable as one of the element types. Moreover, only a few different types of logical transitions (and, or, hierarchical) are sufficient to connect the elements of writing together into clear arguments. Reasoned frameworks can be supported by using hierarchies (lists and trees) that organize information by importance or inclusiveness. Deliberately selecting specific frameworks to structure particular sections of writing can simplify both writing and reading the resulting text.