-
Recent Posts
Archives
Meta
- abstracts academic blogging academic book academic life academic writing argument authority in writing blogging books conclusion conference papers crafting writing discourse dissertation doctoral education doctoral research early career researchers epistemology Europe introduction journal knowledge production literature review mess methods chapter note-taking ontology peer review PhD PhD by publication powerpoint publication plan public engagement publishing readership reading refereeing reflection rejection research education research methods research plan research project scholarly identity signposts theory thesis time voice writing
Twitter Updates
- RT @ProfHacker: New post: "@briancroxall argues that "The Point of Grad School is to Learn to Say 'No'" ow.ly/laZqw 1 hour ago
- @literarychica @Rachel_Bloom seven things to avoid in writing the paper patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/sev… 2 hours ago
- @DrJeremySegrott @explorstyle @JanineEwen now I'm back I need to get up to speed on roster etc. Apols for absence. 2 hours ago
Top Posts & Pages
- not all literature ‘reviews’ are the same
- seven reasons why journals reject papers
- writing the thesis
- about me
- early onset satisfaction – a bad thing for writing and writers
- writing for journals
- academic writing
- the big book thesis has some advantages
- a Foucauldian approach to discourse analysis
- what not to do in a thesis conclusion, part one: christmas present five
Monthly Archives: January 2012
how to make sure your research funding bid is rejected
I’ve been reviewing funding bids. For days. And still more to go. I’ve seen some interesting ideas. But also, so many basic issues that could so easily be sorted out. AAARGH. So, how does setting up your bid to fail … Continue reading
Posted in bid writing, rejection, research funding
Tagged bid rejection, Pat Thomson, research funding
4 Comments
refereeing a journal article. part 3. writing the feedback
Having read the article carefully, and decided whether it’s accept without change, revise and resubmit or reject, there is now the task of writing the feedback to the author/s. There are four things to keep in mind when writing feedback: … Continue reading
Posted in feedback, journal, peer review, refereeing
Tagged academic publishing, feedback, Pat Thomson, peer review, refereeing
12 Comments
refereeing a journal article. part 2: making a recommendation
Journals always ask reviewers to recommend whether an article should be published as is, or whether the writer should do small or large revisions. They also ask if the article should be rejected outright. Making a publication recommendation can feel … Continue reading
Posted in acceptance, journal, peer review, refereeing, rejection
Tagged acceptance of publications, Pat Thomson, refereeing, rejection of articles
3 Comments
refereeing a journal article. part 1: reading
So you’ve just got an article to review and you’re not sure how to go about it. Before even beginning to read, the first thing to get clear about is the STANCE you have to take as a reviewer. Once … Continue reading
Posted in journal, peer review, reading, refereeing
Tagged conflict of interest, critical stance, journal article, Pat Thomson, peer review, refereeing
4 Comments
giving background advice to mainstream media
There are multiple ways for researchers to engage with mainstream media. The roles we take can vary from giver of expert advice through to public commentator. But what we do might also vary according to the kind of media involved … Continue reading
Posted in advice, ethics, media, public engagement
Tagged ethics, media, media advice, Pat Thomson, pub lic engagement
Leave a comment
