Explaining a technical term

[Autodidactuary]

Hello,

Suppose that I want to use a technical term in the body of my report (one that would be considered 'jargon' to my intended audience). Would it be acceptable to use that term provided that it was immediately defined (in simple terms)?

For example, if the term 'loss ratio' is considered jargon but I immediately defined what it was (and provided my definition could be understood by my audience), is it likely that I wouldn't be penalised? I have seen that mark schemes for CP3 make reference to 'unexplained technical terms' as a reason for losing marks. Is it the sort of thing that might be acceptable to have appear in your answer a couple of times but runs the risk of being penalised if used any more than that?

 

[Helen Evans]

Hi

Thanks for your post. Yes, if you feel it is important to bring a technical term in (perhaps because you want to refer to that technical term in several places in your answer) then the right way to do so is name it and immediately define it in a way that will be understood by the audience. This ensure that you hit the requirements of the marking schedule in not having any unexplained technical terms. Do though always weigh up when it is possible to neatly side step a technical term, if you can this is likely to be the best solution.