1 / 40

So, You Think You Can Write? A JSARP Sponsored Intensive Writing Workshop

So, You Think You Can Write? A JSARP Sponsored Intensive Writing Workshop. Abstract:.

abner
Download Presentation

So, You Think You Can Write? A JSARP Sponsored Intensive Writing Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. So, You Think You Can Write? A JSARP Sponsored Intensive Writing Workshop

  2. Abstract: Writing for professional publication is an important and useful skill for student affairs practitioners and faculty members. This intensive writing workshop will introduce writers new to professional writing to the processes of writing, submission, and publication in professional journals. A major workshop goal will be to de-mystify the publication process such that participant writers feel confident about their potential to publish. Participants will experience three-on-one coaching on a piece of writing they bring with them to the workshop.

  3. Workshop Goals • Build a pool of professional writers for JSARP, NASPA journals, and other professional publications. • Provide writing coaching to participants, specifically on a piece of writing brought to the workshop. • Educate participant writers on the processes of topic generation, manuscript production, submission, reviewing, and publishing.

  4. Workshop Goals • Promote the Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice as well as other professional journals and publications in the student affairs field. • Build a cohort of writers who can support each other in future writing projects.

  5. Welcome and Introductions What is your current institution and position? What are your greatest joys about writing? Greatest fears? Participant Profile (JörgVianden)

  6. Agenda 9:00 – 9:15 am Welcome and Introductions 9:15 – 10:30 am How to Write Break Out Groups Just Getting Started Turning a Dissertation into a Manuscript 10:30 – 11:45 am Accomplished Authors Panel 11:45 – 12:30 pm Lunch Break 12:30 – 2:00 pm Writing Coaching (in groups) 2:00 – 3:00 pm Submitting a Manuscript for Review 3:00 – 4:00 pm Wrap-Up and Conclusion

  7. How To Write Break-Out Groups Just Getting Started Kathleen Manning, Alicia Chávez, Ray Quirolgico Turning a Dissertation into a Manuscript Phyllis McCluskey-Titus, Casandra E. Harper, JörgVianden

  8. Chávez, A.F., Ke, F. & Herrera, F. (in review). Native & Hispanic American Constructs of Learning in Cultural Context.

  9. APA Manuscript Types • Theoretical Manuscripts, • Review Manuscripts, • Reports of Empirical Research, • Methodological Manuscripts, • Case Studies, • Media Reviews, • Others?

  10. Fumblerules by William Safire • Proofread carefully to see if you any words out. • Don't use contractions in formal writing. • Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do. • Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky. • Reserve the apostrophe for it's proper use and omit it when its not needed.

  11. Fumblerules by William Safire • Better to walk through the valley of the shadow of death than to string prepositional phrases. • Never, ever use repetitive redundancies. • Never use prepositions to end sentences with. • Don't use Capital letters without good REASON.

  12. Fumblerules by William Safire • In their writing, everyone should make sure that their pronouns agree with its antecedent. • A writer must not shift your point of view. • Use parallel structure when you write and in speaking.

  13. Dos and Don’ts of Scholarly Publishing Proofread Carefully Ask a Colleague to Read Your Manuscript Adhere to the Format Required of the Publication

  14. Accomplished Authors Panel John Dugan, Assistant Professor at Loyola University--Chicago NorbDunkel, Director of Housing and Residence Education at the University of Florida Shaun Harper, Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania Karen Inkelas, Assistant Professor, University of Maryland

  15. Lunch Break Enjoy! Please be back here at 1 PM.

  16. Suggestions to deepen the research findings: • What is different about your study from ones conducted in the past? • How can you report data that makes a significant contribution to the field? • What do these findings mean in the larger context of student affairs practice? • What implications and insights can we suggest that would move the student affairs field to more solutions about the problem under study? • What persistent issues prevail? How can re-state the findings in a way that offers innovative solutions to these issues? • How can we firmly ground our findings in the literature in ways that open up new insights and implications for practice?

  17. Writing Coaching Coaches will work with participants in groups of 3 or 4 to discuss writing, paper topics, and other writing issues. Group members will work through each manuscript to provide feedback to the author.

  18. How to Submit a Manuscript for Publication Patience Whitworth, JSARP Editorial Assistant Kathleen Manning, JSARP Executive Editor

  19. Publication Outlets • Chapters, • Refereed articles, • Books, • Newsletters, • Magazines, • Refereed journals, • Other

  20. How to Submit a Manuscript Read the Guidelines for Authors. Examples: JSARP: www.journals.naspa.org/jsarp ACPA Media: www.myacpa.org/pub/pub_media.cfm Routledge: http://www.routledge-ny.com/info/authors

  21. Timeline for review Submission Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Submission BePress System: Assigns manuscript a number, emails author confirmation Editorial Assistant: Removes all author information, Uploads blind review version, and Assigns 3 reviewers and Associate Editor Goal: 24-48 hours

  22. Timeline for review Submission Review 1 Exec Editor Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor • Review 1 • Reviewers submit decision: • Reject, Major revisions required, Accept pending minor revisions, or Accept • Edited manuscript using Microsoft Word track changes • Confidential note to the Executive Editor • Goal 3 weeks

  23. Timeline for review Submission Decision 1 Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Decision 1 Executive Editor reviews conclusions and renders final decision Goal: 1-2 weeks

  24. Timeline for review Submission Revision 1 Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Revision 1 Author views editors decision letters and edited manuscripts. Author revises the manuscripts based upon this information. Goal 3 weeks

  25. Timeline for review Submission Review 2 Exec Editor Review 1 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor • Review 2 • Reviewers submit decision: • Reject, Major revisions required, Accept pending minor revisions, or Accept • Edited manuscript using Microsoft Word track changes • Confidential note to the Executive Editor • Goal 3 weeks

  26. Timeline for review Submission Decision 2 Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Decision 2 Executive Editor reviews conclusions, edits manuscript, and renders final decision Goal: 2-3 weeks

  27. Timeline for review Submission Exec Editor Review 1 Revision 2 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Publication Copy Editor Revision 2 Author reviews editors decision letter and edited manuscripts. Author makes revisions based upon this information. Goal: 3 weeks

  28. Timeline for review Exec Editor Submission Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Review 3 Manuscript is reviewed by the Executive Editor. This review is to ensure that all changes have been made and it is ready for the Copy Editor. Goal: 1 week

  29. Timeline for review Copy Editor Submission Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor Copy editor works with author directly to prepare the manuscript for publication.

  30. Timeline for review Submission Publication Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Review 2 Exec Editor Revision 2 Decision 2 Copy Editor Publication Executive Editor determines the publication date and communicates with the author.

  31. Timeline for review Submission Exec Editor Review 1 Review 2 Revision 1 Decision 2 Decision 1 Revision 2 Publication Copy Editor A third review and several rounds of copy editing will occur, if necessary. This exists to assure that only the highest quality articles are published.

  32. Decisions • Accept: The manuscript is considered appropriate and timely for the JSARP as is. The manuscript is forwarded to the copyeditor at BePress.

  33. Decisions • Accept Pending Minor Revisions: The manuscript is considered worthy of publication pending the successful completion of a few minor revisions. Authors are requested to make the revisions and the Executive Editor reviews the final manuscript to ensure that the suggestions have been appropriately addressed

  34. Decisions • Major Revisions Required: The manuscript has potential, but revisions and further review must be completed. The author is asked to respond to these and make appropriate changes within one month. Authors submit a revised draft, but these revisions do not guarantee acceptance.

  35. Decisions • Reject: The manuscript is unacceptable for publication in the JSARP. A letter from the executive editor is sent to the author specifying reasons for the rejection. Other sources for publication may be suggested. When appropriate, direct comments from the reviewers, as well as portions of the edited manuscripts, will be shared with the author.

  36. JSARP by the numbers • 150 manuscripts to date • 16 Acceptance (~19% of decisions) • 62 Not accepted (~75% of decisions) • Numbers as of February 15, 2010

  37. Common Submission Mistakes • Author identification, • Lack of APA formatting, • Grammatical and writing errors, • Weak conclusions and implications for practice , • Inadequate connection to student affairs, • Poor writing quality.

  38. What I Consider When Reviewing...Panel Discussion JSARP Editorial Board Members • Alicia Chávez, University of New Mexico • Casandra E. Harper, University of Missouri • Phyllis McCluskey-Titus, Illinois State University • Raymond Quirolgico, University of San Francisco • JörgVianden, University of Arkansas

  39. Questions? Kathleen Manning, Executive Editor Kathleen.manning@uvm.edu Patience Whitworth, Editorial Assistant jsarpedt@uvm.edu

More Related