UWE,  Bristol

Getting  Published:  
Strategies  for  success
Dr  Paul  Spencer

Researcher  Development  Manager
Paul.spencer@uwe.ac.uk
0117  32  83974

Session  overview
• Setting  the  scene
• The  rhetoric  of  publish  or  perish
• The  point  of  scholarly  publishing
• A  publisher’s  point  of  view  
• The  changing  nature  of  scholarly  publication  
– the  era  of  open  access
• An  academic  point  of  view
• Some  practicalities/tips

Publish  or  perish?
Quality  is  measured  by  your  
publication  record;  progress  and  
promotion  are  dependent  on  it  so  
therefore  get  your  work  into  the  
highest  ranking  journal  as  you  can

The  obsession  with  metrics
“Whenever  you  create  league  tables  of
whatever  kind,  it  drives  behaviours that
are  not  ideal  for  the  whole  endeavour.”
“Not  only  are  we  failing  to  provide
the  right  incentives,  we  are  actually
providing  perverse  ones.”
“The  primary  motivation  of  young  scientists  is  to  
publish  in  high  status  journals  (whether  defined  by  
JIF  or  something  else)  and  this  is  a  very  profound  
cultural  problem.”  

 DOI:  10.4929.2.ISBN:  1902369273.1.13140/RG.1363 .

.

How  do  I  get  started? .

About  you Do  you   consider   yourself  a   writer? .

 post   doctoral.   mid   career.Who  am  I  as  a  writer? • Identity • Scholar?  Practitioner?   Apprentice? • Doctoral.  early  career.  mature.   senior .

The  purpose  of  scholarly  writing We  write  so  that  we   can  contribute  to   conversations  about  a   particular  area  of   knowledge  production .

Barriers  to  writing • Lack  of  confidence – – – – Fear  of  rejection Fear  of  open  criticism Insecurity  about  ability  to  write  for  academic  journals Not  knowing  where  to  start • Prioritising  workload – ‘Too  busy’  and  ‘Cannot  find  the  time’   – Talking  about  writing.  is  not  the  same  as  getting  down  to  writing • Post  PhD  exhaustion – Adjusting  from  doctoral  writing  to  journal  writing .

.

Writing  is  hard! .

The  writing  cycle  from  Research  Degree Voodoo  blog .

Writing  as  part  of  a  scholarly  life • Developing  good  habits  around  writing   regularly • Writing  is  also  part  of  the  identity  of  a   researcher • Lots  of  techniques/tools  to  help  on   productivity • BUT  we  mustn’t  forget  WHO  we  are   writing  for .

Who  is  the  reader? • Writing  is  a  social   discursive  practice • Academic  writing   has  specific   language  that   differs  by  discipline • Jargon  or  insider   knowledge .

Discourse  Community (Scientific  Community) “a  local  and  temporary  constraining  system.  a  vital  history.” .  institutional   hierarchies.  A   discourse  community  is  a  textual  system  with   stated  and  unstated  conventions.  vested  interests.   mechanisms  for  wielding  power.   defined  by  a  body  of  texts  (or  more  generally.  and  so  on.   practices)  that  are  unified  by  a  common  focus.

;  institutional  policies.  disciplinary  conventions Research  conventions/standards Text LAYER  ONE Discourse  practice LAYER  TWO Sociocultural  practice LAYER  THREE Taken  from  Thomson  &  Kamler (2013) .Context  for  thesis  writing National  higher  education  policies.;  general   scholarly/disciplinary  conventions Supervision The  field.;  national   scholarship  conventions.  the  literature.

 relational.  audit  regimes Editing  and  refereeing  (philosophical.Context  for  journal  writing Commercial  publication  requirements.  market.  textual  and  secretarial   concerns) Text LAYER  ONE Discourse  practice LAYER  TWO Sociocultural  practice LAYER  THREE Taken  from  Thomson  &  Kamler (2013) .   scholarly/disciplinary  conventions.   promotional.

Which  journal  do  I  submit  to? The  one(s)  that  serve  the  discourse   community  that  you  want  to  engage   with .

Questions  to  ask  yourself • Who  is  in  this  discourse   community? • What  does  it  publish? • What  is  its  mission   statement? • How  does  its  editor  see   the  purpose  of  the   journal? .

A  publisher’s  point  of  view .

How? • Follow  the  reference Which  are  the  journals  that   feature  in  your  literature   reviews? • Follow  the  leading  scholar Which  journals  do  they  publish   in?  What  editorial  boards  do   they  sit  on? .

 Generally  this   applies  to  journal  articles. .   free  of  charge.  but   some  effort  is  being  made  to   apply  OA  to  monographs  and   other  outputs.The  era  of  open  access Open  Access  (OA)  is  the   practice  of  allowing  academic   outputs  to  be  available  to  all.

So  what? There  is  a  seismic  shift   in  scholarly  publishing. .   the  next  generation  of   researchers  who  will   be  operating  in  a   different  climate  in   terms  of  disseminating   their  findings.

The  future  is  Open CC-BY Andreas Neuhold https://commons.org/wiki/File:Open_Science_-_Prinzipien.png .wikimedia.

Open  Access  is… • A natural consequence of the internet • Good  for research – – – – Faster  exchange of ideas Fosters  inter-­‐disciplinarity Enables  text mining Stronger   sense of community ownership • Good  for the taxpayer – Better  cost control (eventually) – Access  to the research  they paid for – Changes  dynamic of public engagement • Affecting  & affected by many aspects of academic life… .

Open  Access  is  NOT… • Free  (or  the  same  as  ‘file-­‐sharing’ • The  end  of  peer  review  or  synonymous   with  low  quality • Easy  to  implement .

.

.

.

.

Open  Research  Advocacy • • • • I  did  say  at  the  outset  I  was  an  advocate  of  open The  future  is  open  – no  doubt  about  that Funders  have  implemented  sticks  (compliance) BUT  understand  the  benefits…  examples? • http://openaccessweek.org • http://whyopenresearch.org .

The  contribution • So  what?  Who  cares? • Simply  reporting   findings  or  engaging   with  the  discourse   community? • Letting  your  academic   voice  be  heard .

• This  requires  focus  and   clarity  of  the  idea  being   put  forward .The  contribution • The  contribution  to  the   discourse  or  the  ‘take   home  message’  has  to  be   clearly  articulated  in  your   writing.

 And  WHY  YOUR   PAPER  IS  IMPORTANT   .  your   approach.  In  most  disciplines   it  should  cover  brief  context  (research  problem).A  good  abstract Don’t  underestimate  the  importance  of  a  good   abstract.  See  it  as   an  important  job  – not  the  thing  you  rush  before   submitting.  This  has  to  be  good  and  takes  work.  It  may  be  the  only  part  of  the  paper  that   most  people  read  (using  searches).  key  findings/conclusions.

 sample.   analysis  and/or  findings  to  assure   crediblity Ø So  what?  Now  what?  Nail  the   significance  offer  opinion  etc • REPORT • ARGUE .An  abstract  in  four  moves • LOCATE Ø Placing  work  in  context  of   discourse  community  – creating   space  for  the  contribution • FOCUS Ø Identify  specific  issues/ideas  that   paper  will  explore Ø Outline  research.

.is  now  a  significant  issue  (in/for)…   because…(Expand  by  up  to  one  sentence  if  necessary) • FOCUS:  In  this  paper  I  focus  on… • ANCHOR:  The  paper  draws  on  (I  draw  on)  findings  from  a   study  of  …  which  used  …  in  order  to  show  that…  (expand   through  additional  sentences) • REPORT:  The  analysis  of  finding  shows  that… • ARGUE:  The  paper  argues  that…and  concludes  (I  conclude)  by   suggesting  that  … .Skeleton  structure  using  five   moves • LOCATE:  ..

A  good  article  should  have… •  a  tight  focus  which  allows  one  (or  at  most  two)  ideas  to  be  dealt   with.  and  about  three  or  four  major  points  in  the  argument  to  be   made •  a  synthesis  of  research  literatures  not  a  review.  referring  only to  the   particular  theoretical  aspects  that  are  needed  in  the  paper •  citations  which  do  not  crowd  out  the  text.  the  majority  of  the   word  allowance  should  be  devoted  to  the  paper  itself.  should  be  explained  largely  in  the  writer’s   own  words  and  as  economically  as  possible.  if  it  is  used.  Reference   should  be  made  only  to  the  key  texts  and  debates  on  which  the   particular  paper  builds  and  to  which  it  makes  a  contribution •  theory.  which  is   after  all  the  contribution. .

Using  abstract  as  a  planning   tool  for  writing • We  can  build  on  the   abstract • Assign  word  limits  to  each   section • Start  to  build  the  sub   headings • Revise  as  necessary .

Sentence/phrase  bank • One  strategy  is  to  look  at  a   good  abstract  and  strip  out   the  details  leaving  the   sentence  skeleton  with  key   signposting  phrases .

uk/ Lots  of  other  useful  stuff  at  thesis  whisperer Thesis  whisperer  blackline  series .Academic  phrasebank Signposting  terms  that  could  be   really  useful  to  help  unblock  writing http://www.phrasebank.ac.manchester.

org/ • Authors  are  those  accountable  for  the  rigour.org.e.    and  drafting  of  versions  of  the  paper   www.icmje.publicationethics.  accuracy  and     integrity  of  the  content • Rights  of  authorship  must  not be  based  on  seniority  of  staff  or   alphabetical  order • www.A  word  on  authorship • Can  you  confirm  the  originality  of  the  work? • Agree  author  order  at  outset • Authors  are people  who  have  made  a  unique  and  substantive   contribution  to  the  manuscript  i.  design  of  study.  data   analysis.uk/ .

 salami  slicing  and  double   duplication  and  submission • Plagiarism  -­‐ is  the  direct  copying  of  other  people’s  work  without   crediting  them.  IEEE  Antennas  and  Propagation  Magazine.  giving  the  impression  that  the  submitted  documents   are  one’s  efforts  and  ideas • Salami  Slicing-­‐ is  the  dividing  of  a  piece  of  a  large  study  into  discreet   papers  for  publication.  45  (4):  47-­‐49] .Plagiarism.  with  each  addressing  a  distinctive  area  and   without  replicating  the  data • Double  submission-­‐ occurs  when  an  individual  submits  two  similar   (almost  identical)  manuscripts  to  two  journals • Double  publication  happens  when  publication  of  a  paper  appears  in   press  that  is  ‘substantially’  identical  to  one  already  published  (eg particularly  in  terms  of  data)  [Stone  2003.

 figures.Submitting the  paper q Online  submission  can  be  time-­ consuming q Registration  at  the  journal’s  website   and  create  an  account q Follow  instructions  for  uploading: § Title § Authors  qualifications  and  place   of  work § Abstract § Main  body  of  text § Tables.  photographs § Letter  confirming  authorship .

  q Experts  will  be  nominated  to  review  your  paper  according  to  the   journal’s  own  criteria q In  academic  journals.  peer  review  is  a  mark  of  quality  and  rigour  of   the  publication  and  aims  to  raise  standards   .Peer-­‐reviewing  process  in  academic  journals q Most  journals  have  a  process  of  anonymous  reviewing  involving  two   or  more  experts.

 then: q List  these  carefully q Respond  to  each  as  appropriate q Return  the  manuscript  outlining  how  you  addressed  the  comments q Do  it  soon .Dealing  with  feedback q Once  reviewed  it  is  checked  by  editor q Accept  (with/without  minor  revision) q Revise   and  resubmit q Reject q If  you  have  comments.

 thesis  chapter   or  consultancy  or  too   journalistic) 3. Too  long  or  too  short   (ignoring  word  limits) 4.  poor  English 6.  Not  properly  contextualised 8.g. Poor  regard  to  journal   conventions 5.   punctuation.Reasons  for  rejection 1.  grammar.  Scrappy  presentation 10. Not  a  proper  journal   article  (e.  No  theoretical  framework 9.  unethical.  Libellous.  rude .  Bad  style.  Fails  to  say  anything  of   significance  or  states  the   obvious  at  tedious  length 7. Sent  to  the  wrong  journal   (doesn’t  fit  journal  aims  or   scope) 2.

Revise  and  resubmit Three  things  to  remember 1) Don’t  dash  off  a  furious  e-­‐mail  to  the  editor! 2) Deal  with  the  negative  commentary 3) Hurry  up  and  get  on  with  it!   .

Supporting  resubmission • Important  to  get   help/support  to   resubmit  from   experienced  scholar • Don’t  let  the  rejection   undermine  your   confidence .

The  final  stage • Receiving.  checking  and  responding  to  proofs • Proof-­‐read  and  respond  to  any  questions  raised  by   copy  editor • Return  proof  as  soon  as  corrections  are  made  and  you   are  satisfied  with  pdf version • Wait  for  online  publication  ahead  of  paper  version • Congratulations .

 it  is   integral  to  being  a  scholar. making  time  for  writing  as  part  of  your  usual.  See  writing  as  equally  worthy   of  your  intellectual   effort  as  any  other  area  of   scholarly   activity .Be  writerly! Think  back  to  your  identity  as  writer.   average  work  week setting  yourself  up  for  writing valuing  writing.

Be  readerly! 1. Knowing  who  your  reader  is 2. Writing  for  the  reader 3. Producing  well-­‐crafted   writing .

Don’t  be  afraid  to  also  write  something   less   apparently   scholarly 3.   to  get  some  track  record . It’s  important  to  write  for  the  people  who   want  and/or  need  to  read  what  you  have  to   say 2.  but  not  instrumental 1. It’s  important  to  get  actually  get  published.Be  strategic.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful