WEEK 1: 9 INSTRUCTION Although it is tempting to let others'criticism be the measure of your writing or even your own worth,don't let it be.The business of reviewing is a subjective process rife with bias and carelessness.Work rejected by one journal is often embraced by another.The only difference between much- published authors and unpublished authors is often persistence and not worthiness.Published authors just keep submitting their work.If one jour- nal rejects their article,they send the article to another.They keep a posi- tive attitude.A professor I know has fond memories of her dissertation advisor,who papered his office with his article rejection notices.To see him working away amidst the negative notices of a lifetime,she says,was inspiring and encouraging. Several of my students have exemplified the usefulness of persistence. In one of my classes,Carrie Petrucci revised her wonderful article arguing for introducing the apology into the criminal justice system.She knew that resistance to her argument would be high,but felt committed to demon- strating that criminal apologies provided some real benefits for victims and perpetrators.So she was very disappointed,but not surprised,when the first journal rejected her article.Petrucci stopped everything she was doing and took two days to make changes based on the comments she had received from the editor and previous readers.She then sent it right back out again to another journal,this time to a social science journal rather than a law journal.After that second journal also rejected her article,she again devoted two days to making changes.Making writing social helped her persevere."What kept me going through two rejections,"she e-mailed me, "was the fact that I had had several people read it prior to my submitting it to any journal and a handful of those people,who had nothing to gain by it(including yourself),had given me the impression that it was strong.... Believe me;I clung to those comments as I got some pretty negative feed- back on rounds one and two." So,she sent it out a third time,to an interdisciplinary journal in law and social science.A few months later,she got a message from that journal accepting her article for publication and stating that the reviewers were extremely enthusiastic about the piece."Congratulations,"the editor exclaimed."It is quite unusual to have a manuscript accepted without requiring any changes.But yours is a high quality product.Good job."Her persistence paid off.She later won the first Nathan E.Cohen Doctoral Stu- dent Award in Social Welfare in 2002 for this article and then got a job working to improve the criminal justice system(Petrucci 2002). One of my students told us the story of a friend who was more faint- hearted.When she received a response from a journal,she opened the let- ter with trepidation.The first paragraph included the sentence:"The reviewers'reports are in and both agree that your article is severely marred by poor writing."Upset,she flung the letter aside and spent an hour in bed ruing her decision ever to enter academia.When her husband got home,he picked the letter off the hallway floor,read it,and entered the bedroom say- ing,"Congratulations,honey!Why didn't you tell me your article got
Although it is tempting to let others' criticism be the measure of your writing or even your own worth, don't let it be. The business of reviewing is a subjective process rife with bias and carelessness. Work rejected by one journal is often embraced by another. The only difference between muchpublished authors and unpublished authors is often persistence and not worthiness. Published authors just keep submitting their work. If one journal rejects their article, they send the article to another. They keep a positive attitude. A professor I know has fond memories of her dissertation advisor, who papered his office with his article rejection notices. To see him working away amidst the negative notices of a lifetime, she says, was inspiring and encouraging. Several of my students have exemplified the usefulness of persistence. In one of my classes, Carrie Petrucci revised her wonderful article arguing for introducing the apology into the criminal justice system. She knew that resistance to her argument would be high, but felt committed to demonstrating that criminal apologies provided some real benefits for victims and perpetrators. So she was very disappointed, but not surprised, when the first journal rejected her article. Petrucci stopped everything she was doing and took two days to make changes based on the comments she had received from the editor and previous readers. She then sent it right back out again to another journal, this time to a social science journal rather than a law journal. After that second journal also rejected her article, she again devoted two days to making changes. Making writing social helped her persevere. "What kept me going through two rejections," she e-mailed me, "was the fact that I had had several people read it prior to my submitting it to any journal and a handful of those people, who had nothing to gain by it (including yourself), had given me the impression that it was strong .... Believe me; I clung to those comments as I got some pretty negative feedback on rounds one and two." So, she sent it out a third time, to an interdisciplinary journal in law and social science. A few months later, she got a message from that journal accepting her article for publication and stating that the reviewers were extremely enthusiastic about the piece. "Congratulations," the editor exclaimed. "It is quite unusual to have a manuscript accepted without requiring any changes. But yours is a high quality product. Good job." Her persistence paid off. She later won the first Nathan E. Cohen Doctoral Student Award in Social Welfare in 2002 for this article and then got a job working to improve the criminal justice system (Petrucci 2002). One of my students told us the story of a friend who was more fainthearted. When she received a response from a journal, she opened the letter with trepidation. The first paragraph included the sentence: "The reviewers' reports are in and both agree that your article is severely marred by poor writing." Upset, she flung the letter aside and spent an hour in bed ruing her decision ever to enter academia. When her husband got home, he picked the letter off the hallway floor, read it, and entered the bedroom saying, "Congratulations, honey! Why didn't you tell me your article got WEEK 1: 9 INSTRUCTION
10 DESIGNING YOUR PLAN FOR WRITING accepted?"Upon actually reading the letter through,she found that the editors had accepted the article pending major revisions.She hired a copy- editor to work with her on her prose and resubmitted the article.When starting out,harsh criticism can stop you in your tracks,but if you persist, you often find that things are not as bad as they seem at first. Successful Academic Writers Pursue Their Passions When students list positive experiences with writing,they often note genuine interest in a topic as a real engine.Successful writers do not write primarily for their professors,their classmates,or their hiring committees. Rather,they focus on the questions that fascinate them. For example,one of my students was writing about the negative effect of welfare reform on Cambodian women.She drafted and revised her article in record time because she was so angry about the policy's consequences.A Korean student who grew up in Japan persevered despite several obstacles to publish her research showing that Koreans in Japan labor under legally imposed hardships.A student who wrote about pedigreed dogs and another who wrote about food metaphors always worked steadily because the topics were also life-long hobbies. Other students used their own experiences of ethnicity,gender,or nationality to reinterpret canonical texts,placing the traditional in a completely new light. The lesson?The world changes quickly,so you are more likely to have positive writing experiences if you follow your deepest interests rather than passing fads.As the authors of The Craft of Research point out, "Nothing will contribute to the quality of your work more than your sense of its worth and your commitment to it"(Booth,Colomb,and Williams 1995,36). My model for this is an artist I discovered while doing research on street art in Washington,D.C.I spent a summer walking the inner city pho- tographing everything creative I could find:murals,street games,hair weaving,garbage can musicians,fence art(Belcher 1987).I spent a lot of time in alleys looking at graffiti and I kept coming across the same thing. Huge spray paintings of women's shoes.Not just life-size,but ten feet across.All of the shoes were portrayed from one side,in profile,and all of them were pumps.I became an expert on the development of this artist whom I never met,soon able to distinguish early pump(when shoes went untitled)from later pump (when shoes appeared with titles like "Black Evening Pump"or "Leopard Skin Pump"and were signed "Ray (c)1987"). Whenever I found a new one,in yet another out of the way place,I was delighted.Because this artist took his or her idiosyncrasy and pushed it, unafraid to paint feminine footwear across an entire urban landscape.So obsess about things,pursue your passions,do not be bullied.Whatever your pump is,paint it
10 DESIGNING YOUR - ... PLAN FOR WRITING ~ accepted?" Upon actually reading the letter through, she found that the editors had accepted the article pending major revisions. She hired a copyeditor to work with her on her prose and resubmitted the article. When starting out, harsh criticism can stop you in your tracks, but if you persist, you often find that things are not as bad as they seem at first. successful Academic Writers Pursue Their Passions When students list positive experiences with writing, they often note genuine interest in a topic as a real engine. Successful writers do not write primarily for their professors, their classmates, or their hiring committees. Rather, they focus on the questions that fascinate them. For example, one of my students was writing about the negative effect of welfare reform on Cambodian women. She drafted and revised her article in record time because she was so angry about the policy's consequences. A Korean student who grew up in Japan persevered despite several obstacles to publish her research showing that Koreans in Japan labor under legally imposed hardships. A student who wrote about pedigreed dogs and another who wrote about food metaphors always worked steadily because the topics were also life-long hobbies. Other students used their own experiences of ethnicity, gender, or nationality to reinterpret canonical texts, placing the traditional in a completely new light. The lesson? The world changes quickly, so you are more likely to have positive writing experiences if you follow your deepest interests rather than passing fads. As the authors of The Craft of Research point out, "Nothing will contribute to the quality of your work more than your sense of its worth and your commitment to it" (Booth, Colomb, and Williams 1995, 36). My model for this is an artist I discovered while doing research on street art in Washington, D.C. I spent a summer walking the inner city photographing everything creative I could find: murals, street games, hair weaving, garbage can musicians, fence art (Belcher 1987). I spent a lot of time in alleys looking at graffiti and I kept corning across the same thing. Huge spray paintings of women's shoes. Not just life-size, but ten feet across. All of the shoes were portrayed from one side, in profile, and all of them were pumps. I became an expert on the development of this artist whom I never met, soon able to distinguish early pump (when shoes went untitled) from later pump (when shoes appeared with titles like "Black Evening Pump" or "Leopard Skin Pump" and were signed "Ray (c) 1987"). Whenever I found a new one, in yet another out of the way place, I was delighted. Because this artist took his or her idiosyncrasy and pushed it, unafraid to paint feminine footwear across an entire urban landscape. So obsess about things, pursue your passions, do not be bullied. Whatever your pump is, paint it
WEEK 1: 11 DAILY TASKS DESIGNING A PLAN FOR SUBMITTING YOUR ARTICLE IN TWELVE WEEKS As mentioned in the Introduction,just knowing what the habits of the suc- cessful academic writer are does not automatically put them within reach. Many of us find it especially hard to pick up the most difficult key to suc- cess:making time for writing.The most important step is making a plan. When you design a plan,you set up goals and deadlines.Once tangible, these goals and deadlines can be realized.This workbook aids you in designing a plan to send an article to a journal in twelve weeks.So,let's move into the next exercise and build a plan for writing. Day 1:Reading the Workbook On the first day of your writing week,you should read the workbook up to this page and answer all the questions posed up to this point. Day 2:Selecting a Text for Revision Many students believe that in order to be published they must start from scratch.Nothing will do but to begin a brand new article on a brave new topic. This is not true.Most students have already written classroom essays,confer- ence papers,or thesis chapters that contain the seed of a publishable journal article.Some students have drafts of coauthored articles that their professors have asked them to improve.Others have been asked to write up parts of a research study they did not conduct.Since revising is the key to publication,I recommend that students focus on reworking an already written text,how- ever poor.The trick is to identify which text provides you with this fertilizable seed.Answer the questions below to help you identify such a text. Considering a Text You Have Already Written Praise.Has a professor ever suggested that you submit a text of yours for publication?If not,has a professor ever suggested that a text you wrote was particularly strong or intriguing? Title: Pleasure.Are there any texts that you enjoyed writing or researching and that you still think back on with gratification? Title:
DESIGNING A PLAN FOR SUBMllTING YOUR ARTICLE IN TWELVE WEEKS As mentioned in the Introduction, just knowing what the habits of the successful academic writer are does not automatically put them within reach. Many of us find it especially hard to pick up the most difficult key to success: making time for writing. The most important step is making a plan. When you design a plan, you set up goals and deadlines. Once tangible, these goals and deadlines can be realized. This workbook aids you in designing a plan to send an article to a journal in twelve weeks. So, let's move into the next exercise and build a plan for writing. Day 1: Readin~ the workbook On the first day of your writing week, you should read the workbook up to this page and answer all the questions posed up to this point. Day 2: Selectin~ a Text for Revision Many students believe that in order to be published they must start from scratch. Nothing will do but to begin a brand new article on a brave new topic. This is not true. Most students have already written classroom essays, conference papers, or thesis chapters that contain the seed of a publishable journal article. Some students have drafts of coauthored articles that their professors have asked them to improve. Others have been asked to write up parts of a research study they did not conduct. Since revising is the key to publication, I recommend that students focus on reworking an already written text, however poor. The trick is to identify which text provides you with this fertilizable seed. Answer the questions below to help you identify such a text. Considering a Text You Have Already Written Praise. Has a professor ever suggested that you submit a text of yours for publication? If not, has a professor ever suggested that a text you wrote was particularly strong or intriguing? Pleasure. Are there any texts that you enjoyed writing or researching and that you still think back on with gratification? WEEK 1: 11 DAILY TASKS
12 DESIGNING YOUR PLAN FOR WRITING Relevance.Do any of your texts address some aspect of a current debate in your discipline?In your recent reading or conversations,do you find yourself thinking of something you wrote and its relevance? Title: Research.Are any of your texts particularly well researched?Did you do substantial reading for one and still have all the sources? Title: Findings.Do any of your texts have particularly strong or unusual find- ings?Do any contain an original insight that could carry a whole article? Title: Conference paper.Have you ever given a conference paper?Did you get a positive response?Did you get useful comments that would help you in revising the paper for publication?(Several studies suggest that about 50 percent of conference presentations are later published as articles [e.g., Autorino et al 2007].) Title: Thesis.Have you written an M.A.thesis or Ph.D.dissertation?Are parts of it worth revising for publication? Title: Rejected article.Have you ever submitted an article for publication and gotten a revise and resubmit notice?If not,have you ever gotten a rejection notice? Title:
12 DESIGNING YOUR -,... PLAN FOR WRITING .!J Relevance. Do any of your texts address some aspect of a current debate in your discipline? In your recent reading or conversations, do you find yourself thinking of something you wrote and its relevance? Research. Are any of your texts particularly well researched? Did you do substantial reading for one and still have all the sources? Findings. Do any of your texts have particularly strong or unusual findings? Do any contain an original insight that could carry a whole article? Conference paper. Have you ever given a conference paper? Did you get a positive response? Did you get useful comments that would help you in revising the paper for publication? (Several studies suggest that about 50 percent of conference presentations are later published as articles [e.g., Autorino et al 2007].) Thesis. Have you written an M.A. thesis or Ph.D. dissertation? Are parts of it worth revising for publication? Rejected article. Have you ever submitted an article for publication and gotten a revise and resubmit notice? If not, have you ever gotten a rejection notice?
WEEK 1:13 DAILY TASKS Texts that Offer Particular Challenges If reading through the above brings several texts to mind,remember the following when making your final choice of which texts to work on. General:Broad surveys.Articles surveying the field or the state of the discipline are rarely published.When they are,veterans in the field write them.The conventional wisdom is that a junior scholar hasn't been follow- ing the debates long enough to be able to weigh in on such matters.If a pro- fessor tells you that you are an exception to this rule,go for it.If a professor hasn't,why attempt to scale entrenched obstacles?You don't have to throw the work away-use the survey to write an introduction to an article. General:Purely theoretical.Articles are rarely published that only explore the strengths and weaknesses of a particular theory without any case study or textual evidence.Junior scholars can make the mistake of assuming that an article that helped them think through something theo- retical will be useful to others.Sometimes it can.Just make sure that a col- league or professor has read the article and agrees that it would be a fresh contribution.Editors will quickly reject theoretical articles on topics that they think have been exhausted or are virtually unassailable.Also,make sure that you send such an article to a journal that is open to very theoreti- cal articles.And remember that most important theories were launched with case studies or textual evidence. General:Dated research.If your paper is quite old,and subsequent research may have vitiated its findings,you may want to think twice about picking it for revision.Some research articles are"evergreen"as they say in the magazine business.Others address a particular academic concern that has waned or have findings that have been superseded or disproved.Such papers can be updated,but you will need to do additional research.If you are not sure where your paper stands,you may want to ask someone in your field to read it with an eye for its current relevance.It is safe to say that choosing to revise anything you wrote more than ten years ago will take a lot of extra work;something your wrote five or six years ago should be carefully reviewed for relevance. General:Outside your discipline.It is harder than most students think to write for another discipline.Just because you took one film class and wrote a paper for it,despite being in the political science department,does not mean that you know how to write for film scholars.You might,but be sure that someone in that field has sanctioned your approach.Many times your ideas will not be new enough or clearly enough related to the field to warrant publication.One study has shown that those from outside a disci- pline are significantly less likely to get published in a journal within that discipline (Goodrich 1945). General:Polemics.The world is a racist,sexist,homophobic,xeno- phobic,classist,and (insert your own concern here)place.However,you can't get published by simply asserting that this is the case,no matter how
Texts that Offer Particular Challenges If reading through the above brings several texts to mind, remember the following when making your final choice of which texts to work on. General: Broad surveys. Articles surveying the field or the state of the discipline are rarely published. When they are, veterans in the field write them. The conventional wisdom is that a junior scholar hasn't been following the debates long enough to be able to weigh in on such matters. If a professor tells you that you are an exception to this rule, go for it. If a professor hasn't, why attempt to scale entrenched obstacles? You don't have to throw the work away-use the survey to write an introduction to an article. General: Purely theoretical. Articles are rarely published that only explore the strengths and weaknesses of a particular theory without any case study or textual evidence. Junior scholars can make the mistake of assuming that an article that helped them think through something theoretical will be useful to others. Sometimes it can. Just make sure that a colleague or professor has read the article and agrees that it would be a fresh contribution. Editors will quickly reject theoretical articles on topics that they think have been exhausted or are virtually unassailable. Also, make sure that you send such an article to a journal that is open to very theoretical articles. And remember that most important theories were launched with case studies or textual evidence. General: Dated research. If your paper is quite old, and subsequent research may have vitiated its findings, you may want to think twice about picking it for revision. Some research articles are "evergreen" as they say in the magazine business. Others address a particular academic concern that has waned or have findings that have been superseded or disproved. Such papers can be updated, but you will need to do additional research. If you are not sure where your paper stands, you may want to ask someone in your field to read it with an eye for its current relevance. It is safe to say that choosing to revise anything you wrote more than ten years ago will take a lot of extra work; something your wrote five or six years ago should be carefully reviewed for relevance. General: Outside your discipline. It is harder than most students think to write for another discipline. Just because you took one film class and wrote a paper for it, despite being in the political science department, does not mean that you know how to write for film scholars. You might, but be sure that someone in that field has sanctioned your approach. Many times your ideas will not be new enough or clearly enough related to the field to warrant publication. One study has shown that those from outside a discipline are .significantly less likely to get published in a journal within that discipline (Goodrich 1945). General: Polemics. The world is a racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, classist, and (insert your own concern here) place. However, you can't get published by simply asserting that this is the case, no matter how WEEK 1: 1] DAILY TASKS