Academic writing: the rules of the game

1
Academic writing the rules of the game

• Miriam Zukas, Director, Lifelong Learning
  Institute and Editor, Studies in the Education of
  Adults

2

• Why do outlets publish pieces?
• How do things get published?
• Why do journals reject work?
• The research and decision-making Stage 1, 2 and 3
• Submission
• What happens next?
• Dealing with the consequences
• Helpful publications

3
Why do outlets publish pieces?

• Because
• They have something to say that fits with the
  outlets ambitions/criteria/aims
• They have something to say that will interest
  readers and hasnt been said before
• They say it well
• Remember all publishing outlets need to publish
  and they all need to sell!

4
How do things get published?

• Non-peer reviewed outlets such as practitioner
  journals (eg Adults Learning, Higher)
• commissioned approaches by the Editor,
  journalists, others associated with the
  publication
• non-commissioned contact the Editor, Board
  member, with your idea before you write it ask
  if theyd be interested
• b) Peer-reviewed outlets
• books approach the publisher before you start
  informal conversations will save a lot of time
  on both your and their behalf work out whats
  already in their stable remember that they have
  to sell copy do you know wholl buy your
  writing? check if the publisher requires you to
  fill in a questionnaire do they want the whole
  text or sample chapters?
• journals (paper and on-line)

5
Why do journals reject work?

• The topic does not relate to the journals aims
• The paper does not appear to have engaged with
  the work of others in the same area and may
  therefore be repetitious
• The papers purpose is unclear
• The argument in the paper is under-developed
• The claims made by the paper are not justified
• The style/length/format is not whats requested
  by the journal
• The paper is poorly presented with missing
  references, typos, poor grammar etc.

6
The research and decision-making Stage 1

• DECISION MAKING 1
• What do you want to say?
• Who do you want to read it?
• RESEARCH 1
• Whats been said already and how might you
  contribute?
• What publications might be suitable?
• Why?
• WRITING 1
• See if you can write a brief summary (abstract)
  of what you intend to write about.

7
The research and decision-making Stage 2

• DECISION MAKING 2
• Decide on your target publication(s) in view of
  Stage 1
• RESEARCH 2
• Understand how your target publication(s) select
  work to be published check the notes for
  contributors, make sure you understand the
  publication target audience, make sure you take
  note of their style, ensure that you know what
  theyve already published on the topic write to
  the Editor to see if theyd be interested in a
  piece like yours. Talk to others who have
  published in this outlet.
• WRITING 2
• Go back to your summary now that you know a bit
  more about where you want the piece to go, does
  it fit with the publication? Will readers of the
  publication want to engage with it? Are you
  willing to change it to fit? If not, go back to
  DECISION MAKING 2 and rethink go round the loop
  again.

8
Writing Stage 3

• READ back copies of the publication again
• READ what others have said in relation to what
  you want to write
• Decide how you might build on what others have
  said
• WRITE a first draft
• Circulate your first draft to at least a few
  others for comment
• WRITE a second draft
• Circulate again if necessary repeat as
  necessary

9
Submission

• Make sure you know exactly how to submit to the
  journal (electronic, hard copies etc)
• Make sure you have followed their guidelines to
  the letter
• Ask yourself honestly
• Have I related this paper to the journals aims?
• Have I engaged with the work of others in the
  same area? Is my paper saying something fresh or
  could it be accused of being repetitious?
• Is the purpose of my paper clear?
• Is my argument well developed?
• Are all my claims justified?
• Is the style/length/format whats requested by
  the journal?
• Is my paper perfectly presented in terms of
  references, typing, grammar, conciseness etc?
• SEND IT OFF

10
What happens next?

• Editor/publisher decides if it fits with the
  outlets purpose
• Editor/publisher decides if its in a fit state
  to be sent out for review
• Editor/publisher sends out to reviewers (2 or 3)
  remember that reviewers may well be people
  mentioned in your piece particularly if you are
  challenging their work. Implication always
  write as if they are going to read your work.
• Reviewers normally review pieces which are
  anonymous if you want to ensure that your work
  is read anonymously, have you remembered to
  anonymise eg self-references?
• Remember that reviewers are usually not paid
  therefore expect to wait a few months before
  hearing (some journals have targets, but Editors
  have no control over reviewers they are doing
  them a favour!)
• Editors will send decision plus review(s) back to
  you dont expect to see all of them. Editors
  will take into account reviewers views but, in
  the end, will have to come to a decision if
  reviewers disagree (or send out for another
  review).
• Possible outcomes accept, accept conditionally
  (minor amendments, major amendments), resubmit
  for new review, reject.

11
Dealing with the consequences

• REMEMBER THAT VERY FEW PAPERS ARE ACCEPTED
  WITHOUT AMENDMENT
• Read your reviews
• Give your reviews and the original paper to
  someone else to read
• Discuss what actions you can take to respond to
  reviews
• Give yourself a deadline for rewriting and
  resubmission dont leave it too long!
• Rewrite
• Resend with a covering letter telling the Editor
  how you have responded to comments in the reviews
  (you dont have to agree with everything but
  explain why you havent taken advice, as well as
  how you have taken it)
• Wait again .
• Repeat if necessary

12
Helpful publications

• Murray, R (2004) Writing for Academic Journals,
  Open University Press
• Murray, R (2006) Writing Your Thesis, Open
  University Press
• Elbow, P (1998) Writing without Teachers, Oxford
  University Press
• Ganobcsik-Williams (Ed)(2006) Teaching Academic
  Writing in the UK, Routledge
• Wellington, J (2003) Getting Published A Guide
  for Lecturers and Researchers, Routledge