You reread a paragraph and realize you need to slow down to understand your own explanation. Every sentence sounds academic. The point is harder to find than it should be.
The handbook argues for clear scholarly writing. The aim is to make the reasoning easier to follow while keeping the distinctions the research actually requires. A shorter sentence isn't an improvement if it changes the meaning.
Put the action where readers can see it
Compare 'An examination of differences was undertaken' with 'We compared the two groups.' The second version identifies the action directly. Add the detail readers need about the groups and comparison rather than making them work through unnecessary wording.
Use the conventions appropriate to the field, but question phrases that add formality without information.
Define the technical terms that earn their place
Some terms carry a precise meaning that ordinary language can't fully replace. Keep those terms and explain them for the intended audience. Remove an acronym that appears only once unless there's a good reason to retain it.
Don't substitute a familiar word if it blurs an important methodological distinction.
Give each paragraph a clear job
State the point, provide the relevant evidence or reasoning, and show how it connects to the question. If the paragraph contains three separate arguments, consider separating them.
A transition should explain a relationship: contrast, consequence, limitation, or next step. It doesn't need to sound grand.
Check whether simplification changes the claim
'These scores improved' and 'The intervention caused improvement' are different statements. Clear writing should make the design's limits more visible, not remove them for a smoother conclusion.
Read the final claim against the evidence and revise both exaggerated and unnecessarily vague wording.
Ask someone to explain the paragraph back
A colleague outside your immediate specialty can help identify missing context. Ask what they think the main point is and where they became uncertain. Their response can reveal an explanation you assumed the reader already had.
You don't need to make every specialist passage suitable for every possible audience. Write for the people the work is meant to reach.
Check the relationship between two neighboring sentences
Sometimes each sentence is understandable, but the reader can't see why one follows the other. Ask whether the second sentence provides evidence, an explanation, a contrast, or a limitation. Make that relationship explicit where the argument needs it.
For example, a sentence describing a change in scores shouldn't slide directly into a sentence claiming that a method caused the change. The missing step may be a design limitation that needs to be stated, not a smoother transition. Clearer writing can reveal a reasoning problem that elegant phrasing would otherwise conceal.
Read the revised paragraph aloud or ask a suitable colleague to summarize it. Check the summary against what you meant to claim. If it sounds stronger or different, look for wording that invites the wrong inference. Precision isn't a reason to keep unnecessary complexity. It is a reason to make the intended meaning easier to recover without quietly changing the evidence or the argument.
Choose one dense paragraph and underline its main claim. Then identify the evidence and the necessary terms. Rewrite around those elements and check that the meaning remains intact. The goal is a reader who can spend attention on the idea instead of decoding the prose.
Adapted from The New Faculty Handbook by Zafer Unal, pp. 98-99.
