An investigation of the use of the IMRAD format for Biology students' laboratory reports

Abstract

Academic discourse serves as a platform for the systematic communication of scientific findings, with laboratory reports being a primary type employed by researchers and students. These reports follow specific conventions and formats, ensuring clarity and credibility in scientific communication. This study investigates the organizational structure of English-language Biology laboratory reports, focusing on students' adherence to the Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion (IMRAD) model. After compiling a corpus of fifty Biology students' laboratory reports from Ouargla University, Algeria, the researchers adopted a qualitative approach and a thematic analysis of data. The results revealed overall adherence to the IMRAD format, with minor variations, notably variations in subheadings within the Methods section, transitions between sections, and the structure of the Discussion section, reflecting disciplinary norms. These findings suggest opportunities for teachers to explicitly address the nuances of IMRAD structure and writing conventions within the domain of Biology. By comprehending how students apply this model, instructors can design more effective lessons and writing instructions that foster clarity and disciplinary understanding in laboratory report writing. This study emphasizes the importance of exploring the impact of explicit instruction on the quality of student writing and understanding of IMRAD conventions. It is recommended that these variations be further explored in order to enhance the comprehension of students' communication skills, thereby improving their writing quality in the academic landscape. Additionally, this research stresses the importance of exploring the impact of explicit instruction on student writing quality and understanding of IMRAD conventions.

Keywords

• academic discourse
• biology
• disciplinary norms
• imrad model
• laboratory reports