-
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 @John__Field: Social media and social capital wp.me/p1ZDGy-6P 1 hour ago
- @germankiwi yes of course. 3 hours ago
- May 21 wp.me/p31JXB-9z 5 hours ago
Top Posts & Pages
- seven reasons why journals reject papers
- writing the thesis
- early onset satisfaction – a bad thing for writing and writers
- a Foucauldian approach to discourse analysis
- about me
- oh no, someone did the research before me...
- academic writing
- methodology isn't methods.. or... what goes in a methods chapter
- should you, could you, would you… co-write with your supervisor?
- writing for journals
Category Archives: rejection
seven reasons why journals reject papers
I’ve written about rejections several times, and most of this is scattered throughout the blog, so I thought it might be helpful to amalgamate the most important points together. All in one place. There are some very common reasons why … Continue reading
Posted in journal, premature publication, publishing, refereeing, rejection, writing, writing research
Tagged journals, Pat Thomson, reasons for rejection
9 Comments
the cruel reviewer
It’s funny how the bad stuff sticks with you. I was thinking about this last week as I was giving feedback after a viva and hoping that the candidate was hearing all the good things and not just the small … Continue reading
Posted in feedback, journal, rejection, revision
Tagged bad review, Hugh Miller, Pat Thomson, rejection, Steven Mumford
9 Comments
what’s at stake for an early career researcher in going for publication in a top ranked journal ?
I often get asked in workshops whether early career researchers should aim to get into a top journal. I want to give the first two parts of my answer in this post. My first response – WHO IS SAYING THIS … Continue reading
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 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