Summative Analysis of Mechanical Engineering

           Mechanical Engineering is a very versatile field. Because of the wide variety of people and work done in the field, we see many different styles of writing from very serious and concise to very fun and enjoyable to read. We see academic articles display as much credibility and logic as they can whereas we see simple engineering blogs on the internet showing fun things to do backed up with lots of pictures. From kids in elementary school to doctoral degree holders working at labs around the globe, engineering has depth in the world. Mechanical Engineering is both a serious and fun field. This is evident in the many mediums we see in today’s life.

            Through two months long of research, an interview, and blog posting, I have seen and heard about the many types of communication in the field. First is the Mechanical Engineering blog. Simply searching “Mechanical Engineering Blog” into the Google search bar will have you stumble upon: http://www.mechanicalengineeringblog.com/. The blog itself is very colorful, contains several vibrant images, and the word choice can be understood by a large spectrum of mechanical engineers (ME’s). A college student, someone going into the field, and a doctoral student are likely to be able to read and understand the content as well as enjoy reading it.  From these three aspects, we see that the blog is attempting to address a large internet audience of ME’s. By the use of vibrancy, images, and color, it invokes a certain happy emotion. It follows the use of pathos and invokes a happy sense of emotion, almost like “Yay, Mechanical Engineering!” It makes ME look good. Going through the different posts navigations on the page, we see interesting posts of inventions, mini do-it-yourself projects, findings in the field, and also contains helpful forums, Q and A’s, and tips for ME’s. We see the use of logos in our blog. Logical instructions in the do-it-yourself projects, explanations of new ideas in the field, and it appeals to the mind and thought process of a ME.

The main thing that lacks from this blog is credibility. When we see this scholarly articles, university research reports, and instruction manuals, we always find an area where sources are cited. Several primary and accredited secondary sources are used in these articles to prove their point. In the blog, random people post on it and with a lack of sources. This puts the blog at the bottom of the list for great credibility. However, ethos is invoked as the reader is engrossed in projects that can be completed and are known to have success. Most, if not all, of the projects have been done before which shows that there is experience to back them up. The posts regarding new findings and inventions are also normally backed up by at least one or two sources. However, a doctoral degree holder may laugh at a lack of sources, but younger ME’s will find this blog enjoyable. It will intrigue the curious and fascinated mind set through emotion and logic. It will get people thinking about what is going on in the field and keeps a positive image on the field.

When looking at ethos, we turn to the big leagues. We look at scholarly articles, doctoral theses, master theses, and so on. I did more in depth research on this topic and interviewed a member of the Michigan State University faculty to understand what went into the highest level of communication. Professor Reinhard Schwienhorst is an experimental particle physicist for the ATLAS Corporation at CERN in Switzerland. He works on a team of six and helps to process the terabytes upon terabytes of data used to prove just a single (or a few) experiment(s). It seems to me that people always perceive the doctoral degree holders as a bunch of essay writers, but this is simply not true. According to the interview, Dr. Schwienhorst mainly uses speech and power points to communicate his findings. He uses a logical order to present his findings. He will start out with what is believed to be happening in the experiment, back it up with tons of data, and then conclude. “I sometimes use little videos and animations to keep people engaged,” he says. He will attend several conferences throughout the year and uses video conferencing often to keep in touch with his group and the few thousand others at CERN. As far as the credibility goes in his findings, he claims that, “We are very limited by the data.” He works almost entirely from the data collected at CERN. Since CERN is already a highly accredited research base, winning a Nobel Prize in Physics in 2013, there is little to no question that the primary source of which he reports from is credible.

Aside from presentations, Dr. Schwienhorst does write reports. He uses a pretty standard and logical format. He formats his paper with the title and abstract at the beginning like a usual scholarly article. He then states the thesis and supporting arguments for the experiment he is working on. He then goes through several bits of relevant data using charts, tables, and whatever else is necessary to back up his thesis. Usually, the data is the heaviest part considering the amount of data created at CERN and that he has to explain the data and its significance. He then concludes with a conclusion and a list of sources (mainly CERN based). This is the typical format that most people know and it is a very logical order. His reports are both very logical and very credible. “In my writing, we stay away from any use of emotion. It detracts from the message,” he says. In this type of scholarly and research writing, no pathos is used according to him. This is a complete change from the blog where pathos is used to show a positive image of engineering. In this sense, we see that logos and ethos become much more prominent as rhetorical strategies used in writing.

We also see this in other scholarly articles. First off, the title: “Mechanical Characterization, Computational Modeling, and Biological Considerations for Carbon Nanomaterial-Agarose Composites for Tissue Engineering Applications” (Nilesh Billade). A very specific sixteen word title. This article is a doctoral dissertation for future reference. After barely making through the abstract myself, I determined that the audience is not for people in undergraduate studies. The diction shows a high level of education and the audience is targeted towards doctoral degree holders. The article can also be used in the specific field of study, but the author’s main goal is to receive the doctorate. The author has several sources listed at the bottom and through thorough explanation, makes a credible and logical approach to his topic. No emotion is displayed. This real scholarly article example confirms what my interviewee said. There is a strong use of logos and ethos, but no (or a lack of) pathos. In this article, we find pages upon pages of 12-point, double-spaced text along with a few graphs and data tables. Lots of logic, facts, definitions, explanations, etc are used in this article.

In conclusion, we have taken a look at two ends of the spectrum for Mechanical Engineering. Mechanical Engineering is a very versatile field. Because of the wide variety of people and work done in the field, we see many different styles of writing and mediums from very serious CERN reports from Professor Schwienhorst to the very fun and enjoyable to read Mechanical Engineering blog. We have seen that the academic articles display as much credibility and logic as they can whereas the blogs and trade journals use simpler diction and convey more emotion. From kids in elementary school to doctoral degree holders working at labs around the globe, engineering has depth in the world. It is intriguing to all. Mechanical Engineering is both a serious and fun field. This is evident in the many mediums we see in today’s life.