Mrs. Reed introduced our final: an argumentative essay that was ten pages long which came along with a presentation about our topic. I gave my friends a hand sign that we were flicked for it was hard to even write a five page essay on something we were interested in.

I started looking up some topics that I would be hyped to research about. But every subject I clicked, the topic’s articles seemed a little capricious, almost unbiased evidence, a thing that we focused in class. Another issue would have credibility, ethos, logos, and have ebbing style, but it wasn’t something I would want to proudly present. Out of the blue, paper about a particle in Dark Matter came up. I had no clue about the topic but gave it a try.

Hours passed by due to scrutinizing the text along with determining whether this was bearable. The published papers about how weakly interactive massive particles do not follow the Standard Model blew my mind. The papers, first of all, were based on experiments the researchers had performed, and these researchers are the top of their field, meaning that the sources were credible. The dissertations that were “review papers” were unbiased; they were just presenting information, but others were biased because they were trying to convince their point was valid through the abstract calculations and difficult reasoning.

The reasoning was well built. The introduction/abstract provided the outline of the paper, then the paper started building up each component necessary for the paper. It started off with the basic concepts and the “fundamental stuff” from the field, briefly explaining the concept and its significance. Then, there were the set parameters that the experiment/model followed, and then came the calculations. This already provided immense detail about the subject, but there was still much more vital information about the subject.

Points of view were included as well. Each paper had required at least thirty other sources that were to back up the shortest paper. The authors wrote how each proponent of the field would have viewed their work using the books and papers that those people used and they corroborated or refuted their views with it, showing the spectrum of agreement/disagreement.

As I looked back, I saw how much more intricate the process of research was. It required extreme perusal of the text, including the logic, ethical appeal, style, flow, and the points of view. 


CC BY-SA 4.0 Reflective Essay On Research by Joseph is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Youth Voices is an open publishing platform for youth. The site is organized by teachers with support from the National Writing Project. Opinions expressed by writers are their own.

CC BY-SA 4.0All work on Youth Voices is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License


We welcome new members. You can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Missions on Youth Voices

Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?

Create Account