Revising and reviewing your paper
Welcome
Session overview
  Length – 1 hour
  Presentations and activities


Ground Rules
  Raise hand for urgent questions
  Use chat for general questions and activities
  Arriving late/leaving early
Learning outcomes
At the end of this workshop, you will:
appreciate the practicalities of submitting papers for
 publication;
recognise common errors made in paper submissions;
be able to identify techniques for dealing with the
 review process.
Last session, we looked at...
The literature review
Getting your first draft on paper
The abstract


Any questions?
From first draft to finished article
Have a break after your first draft
Critical reviewers are key
  Don't ask too much of people
  Be clear about the type of feedback you want
  Chose people you can trust
  Value criticism and diversity of opinion
  You don't have to agree with your reviewer
  Acknowledgments/co-authors
Be prepared to rewrite, and rewrite...
But also be prepared to submit
Submitting your paper
The review process
 Submission systems
 Author checklists
 Blind/double-blind reviews
 Timescales
Getting your paper back
 Accepted as is
 Accepted with amendments
 Resubmission
 Reject
Don’t give up!
Next steps
   Have a backup plan
   Make changes quickly
   Review and address the feedback thoroughly
   Make it easy for the reviewer
   Get another critical review
Things to remember
   Reviewers’ opinions are opinions
   Reviewers disagree
   Some reviewers are poor reviewers
   Develop a thick skin
Activity: common problems

Think of (student) papers you’ve read… what was wrong
 with them?

Please make your suggestions in the chat window.
Common problems (1)
Content
  not appropriate for conference/journal
  no discussion of obvious flaws
  not adding anything to the field
 Context
  inadequate literature review
  lack of knowledge of the field
  too few/inappropriate references
Common problems (2)
Structure
  lack of clear structure
  no clear point/purpose
  no conclusions
 Style
  poor written English
  too informal
  not writing for the audience
Common problems (3)
Format
  spelling, punctuation, grammar
  reference format, number, type
  formatting, style and layout
  language and writing style
  length
  elements missing
Activity: dealing with rejection

Rejection is an inevitable part of getting published.
 How can you deal with it?

Please add your suggestions to the chat window.
Some ideas
Have a backup plan
Take some time out but don’t sit on it
Remember that reviewers are human
Don’t waste time plotting revenge
Have more than one paper on the go
Remind yourself that ‘no-one finds it easy’

More Related Content

DOCX
Thesis tips
PPT
Research presentation for mba
PPTX
IELTS listening: About the Test
PPTX
Thesis powerpoint
PPTX
ADP L9 Abstract Peer Review
PPTX
Understanding writing process
PPTX
Presentation of research work
PPTX
Academic presentations 1
Thesis tips
Research presentation for mba
IELTS listening: About the Test
Thesis powerpoint
ADP L9 Abstract Peer Review
Understanding writing process
Presentation of research work
Academic presentations 1

What's hot (17)

PPT
How to Defend your Thesis Proposal like a Professional
PPT
Notetaking in algebra
PPTX
The writing process
PPT
Notes taking skills
PDF
2. note taking skills russell rodrigo
PDF
Thesis defense tips
PPTX
How do I revise Sociology?
PPT
The Writing Process Powerpoint
PPTX
An overview of writing the writing process
PPTX
Glit6756 consumers seminar 2 (Kentville)
PPT
Learning Skills 4 Presenting Information Slides
PPT
Cornell notes
PPTX
The writing process
PPTX
Eas321 seminar 11
PPTX
Glit6756 consumers sem2
PPT
Writing process
PPTX
Note-Taking
How to Defend your Thesis Proposal like a Professional
Notetaking in algebra
The writing process
Notes taking skills
2. note taking skills russell rodrigo
Thesis defense tips
How do I revise Sociology?
The Writing Process Powerpoint
An overview of writing the writing process
Glit6756 consumers seminar 2 (Kentville)
Learning Skills 4 Presenting Information Slides
Cornell notes
The writing process
Eas321 seminar 11
Glit6756 consumers sem2
Writing process
Note-Taking
Ad

Similar to WriteTEL: Session4 (20)

PPT
WriteTEL: Session3
PPT
How to Read, Write, Present Papers
PPT
how to read and write research papers
PPTX
Getting Published Seminar
PPTX
Getting Published Workshop
PDF
stevens.pdf
PDF
PPT
Slides_on_Publishing_Simon_French
PPT
PeerReview
PPT
Getting Published Workshop
PPTX
Academic writing 2021
PPT
effective-learning1.ppt effective learning
PPT
WriteTEL: Session1
PPTX
How to write a research paper for an international peerreviewed journal
PPT
1 howto-mehrnoush-shamsfard-web
PPTX
Publishing in Academic Journals
PPT
WriteTEL: Session2
PPTX
PORTFOLIO ENTRY # 2
PPT
Elements of scientific writing3
PPTX
Djim workshop on peer review 2012
WriteTEL: Session3
How to Read, Write, Present Papers
how to read and write research papers
Getting Published Seminar
Getting Published Workshop
stevens.pdf
Slides_on_Publishing_Simon_French
PeerReview
Getting Published Workshop
Academic writing 2021
effective-learning1.ppt effective learning
WriteTEL: Session1
How to write a research paper for an international peerreviewed journal
1 howto-mehrnoush-shamsfard-web
Publishing in Academic Journals
WriteTEL: Session2
PORTFOLIO ENTRY # 2
Elements of scientific writing3
Djim workshop on peer review 2012
Ad

WriteTEL: Session4

  • 2. Welcome Session overview Length – 1 hour Presentations and activities Ground Rules Raise hand for urgent questions Use chat for general questions and activities Arriving late/leaving early
  • 3. Learning outcomes At the end of this workshop, you will: appreciate the practicalities of submitting papers for publication; recognise common errors made in paper submissions; be able to identify techniques for dealing with the review process.
  • 4. Last session, we looked at... The literature review Getting your first draft on paper The abstract Any questions?
  • 5. From first draft to finished article Have a break after your first draft Critical reviewers are key Don't ask too much of people Be clear about the type of feedback you want Chose people you can trust Value criticism and diversity of opinion You don't have to agree with your reviewer Acknowledgments/co-authors Be prepared to rewrite, and rewrite... But also be prepared to submit
  • 6. Submitting your paper The review process Submission systems Author checklists Blind/double-blind reviews Timescales Getting your paper back Accepted as is Accepted with amendments Resubmission Reject
  • 7. Don’t give up! Next steps  Have a backup plan  Make changes quickly  Review and address the feedback thoroughly  Make it easy for the reviewer  Get another critical review Things to remember  Reviewers’ opinions are opinions  Reviewers disagree  Some reviewers are poor reviewers  Develop a thick skin
  • 8. Activity: common problems Think of (student) papers you’ve read… what was wrong with them? Please make your suggestions in the chat window.
  • 9. Common problems (1) Content not appropriate for conference/journal no discussion of obvious flaws not adding anything to the field  Context inadequate literature review lack of knowledge of the field too few/inappropriate references
  • 10. Common problems (2) Structure lack of clear structure no clear point/purpose no conclusions  Style poor written English too informal not writing for the audience
  • 11. Common problems (3) Format spelling, punctuation, grammar reference format, number, type formatting, style and layout language and writing style length elements missing
  • 12. Activity: dealing with rejection Rejection is an inevitable part of getting published. How can you deal with it? Please add your suggestions to the chat window.
  • 13. Some ideas Have a backup plan Take some time out but don’t sit on it Remember that reviewers are human Don’t waste time plotting revenge Have more than one paper on the go Remind yourself that ‘no-one finds it easy’