There is investigation of writing in within disciplinary context. There are two kinds of lab reports which are written for same purposes, these are scientific reports in which there is done a comparison of academic writing.

        Academic writing is basically having central theme with every part contributing to the main line of argument without any repetition and digressions. Its main objective is to inform rather than to entertain. Her is the comparison of theses scientific reports in a literature way that how they are representing their reports in a more manner full way. Mentioning that report submitted by Ali Haider Bachir with SID: 8104461 are considered as report 1 and report submitted by Reda Alhouseni with SID; 8113670 is considering as report 2 for ease of comparison. There will be an honest comparison on basis of the standards of academic writing that a writer must adopt and all for reader’s comfort and facility (Carter, Sanger and Bowrin).

Report  1: Report Written by Ali Haider Bachir

Report 2; Report written by Reda Alhouseni

Discussion on Comparing academic skills of two different writers:
Comparison:
v  Complexity of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Written language is more complex than normally spoken language especially in report 1 as compare to the report 2. An academic language has more longer and dense words with more variability of vocabulary. By comparing these two reports it is noticed that report 2 is lexically more dense and with authentic vocabulary than report 1. It uses more noun based phrases and verb based phrases. The language used in report 2 is more complex grammatically and has shorter texts with internment of more subordinate clauses and more phrases (Carter, Sanger and Bowrin).

v  Formality of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Academic writing has more formal language. While seeing this impact of language in these two reports it is conducting that report 2is written more formally than report 1 but in these 2 reports use of first person has not been seen with avoidance of colloquial words and expressions in a representable way (Sharples).

v  Precision of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

        A very important feature of academic writing is that data in with more facts and figures are given more precisely than normally spoken language so if there is comparison of these two reports it is seen that report is not precisely written as much as report 2 if there is mentioning of collected data of report 2 there is more precise written form of data in report 2 as compared to report 1 (Goddard and Patterson).

v  Objectivity of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

        Written and academic language is more general and specific than getting personal. If there is analysis of these two given reports according to this parameter, both of these have more general data with major emphasis and focus on providing information and arguing on a conflict rather than discussing themselves or their personal review. There is more usage of noun and adverbs in these than usage of verbs (Centre for Academic Writing).

v  Explicitness of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

        As academic writing is more explicit about the connection with the written text and if there is a strict comparison to it the writer of report 2 is more responsible to make it clear to the writer that is foremost important for convenience of reader. It is more clear in report 2 that how the different and various texts are related with others for more clear understanding and for better convenience. In report 2writter is making text more explicit and clear with connecting them by the use of different signaling words (Bazerman).

v  Accuracy of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            If there is comparison done on basis of accuracy of these two reports, report 2 is more accurate because of use of its various vocabulary and with more convenient usage for words for the readers ease with words having more specific narrow meanings. There is a more clear linguistic distinguishes in report 2 rather than report 1. Vocabulary that has been used is more versatile and provide more facility and simplicity to people who are willing to understand these reports (Mifflin and Prio).

v  Hedging of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            By comparing these reports it is honestly noticed that the strength of the claims making in report 2 is stronger than the first one as what the writer is saying in his report has to be support with some authentic an meaning full profess so their report can have a significant impact on the people who are reading it or who are supposed to read it. Different subjects are specified with various claims and it matters only to the subject writer has choose for its interest (Mifflin and Prio).

v  Responsibility of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Now if there is comparison of responsibility with in these two reports, the writer of report 2 was more responsible for proving its evidences he has mentioned because in academic writing it is the first duty of writer to prove its talks with full proof and must have sufficient evidences for proving their claims in a strongest and a manner able way. There is more demonstration and understanding of text the writer is using and every point is discussed in a separate way with specific and enough kind of justification (Centre for Academic Writing).

v  Organization of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Organization of any report can be seen and measured only by a general review of it so if there has taken a review from up to down of these two reports, report 2 has been written in a more organized way because everything is listed a systematic step to step way with a full ease for reader. Flow is in a logical way when moved from one section to another which is creating better understanding of procedures and other type of descriptions. The structure is more easily determined in a better report (Carter, Sanger and Bowrin).

v  Planning of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            By looking after on a well-planned writing it is clear that report 2 is written in amore planned and measureable way than the other one which is the first priority of an authentic academic writer. Report 2 is taken with more research and evaluation with some specific purpose and plan (Mifflin and Prio).

v  Addressing of questions of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            By comparing these two reports with a readers view, it is clearly noticed that report 2 is providing more ease to answering the questions related to the report writer has made and it’s all depends on how a writer managed his evidences with context he is providing and assuming the mind of reader that how reader can more easily pick his points in a more facilitative way. So a reader can get more satisfactory answers to his questions by reading report 2 (Carter, Sanger and Bowrin).

v  Vocabulary of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Vocabulary that has been used by the writer of report 2 is providing more understanding to the reader with its variety. The writer is using more complex but general vocabulary so a reader can get knowledge easily from reading report in a formal but planned way. Vocabulary is one of the parameter that is considered as powerful equipment to the readers also for the standard academic writing. There are more powerful phrases and sentences used in report 2 which is making it more authentic in an academic way and also providing more grip in the readers point of view (Centre for Academic Writing).

v  Audience understanding of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            Off course if there is mentioning of all above aspects, there is more understanding of audience by reading report 2. As there is same type of topic for both reports but the readers command will enhance by scanning report 2 more precisely and much accurately. Report 2 is providing something worth that can grasp its reader’s attention and a more focused reader and attention can only be focused if writer is writing of their taste or making in accordance with their taste (Centre for Academic Writing).

Conclusions on Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

            When a reader is reading these two different writer’s report, a normal reader can easily estimate that which is providing more ease to him and which is providing information in a more manner able way because anything that a reader reads is for getting information and authentic knowledge with as facility as possible so report 2 is providing more ease and comfort of understanding as compared to report 1 because in report 2 everything written in a planned and systematic way with variable use of vocabulary and better understanding of reader. A good teacher or a good writer first must hold its audience attention than he will be able to convey something interesting to people. Criticism may not be agreeable but it is somehow mandatory because it calls attention and interest of getting attention.

References of Comparing academic skills of two different writers:

Bazerman. The informed writer: Using sourcesin the disciplines. Boston: Houghton , 1995.

Carter, Goddard, Danuta. Sanger and Bowrin. Working with texts: Acore book for language analysi. New York: Routledge, 1997.

Centre for Academic Writing. Coventry University Guide to Referencing in Harvard Style . Coventry : Coventry: Centre for Academic Writin, 2016.

Creme and Lea. Writing at university: A guide for students. Buckingham,UK: Open University Press, 2008.

Goddard and Patterson. Language and Gender. London & NY: Routledge, 2000.

Mifflin, Bazerman and Prio. What writing does and how it does it: An introduction toanalyzing texts and textual practices. New Jursey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004.

Sharples. How we write: Writing as creative design. London & New York: Routledge, 1999.