<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for patter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://patthomson.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>research education, academic writing, public engagement, funding, other eccentricities.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 12:26:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on seven reasons why journals reject papers by Friday links: can you identify any ecosystem on sight, why papers get rejected, your state bird is lame, and more &#124; Dynamic Ecology</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/seven-reasons-why-paper-are-rejected-by-journals/#comment-9324</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Friday links: can you identify any ecosystem on sight, why papers get rejected, your state bird is lame, and more &#124; Dynamic Ecology]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 12:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2090#comment-9324</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] is a nice link to seven common mistakes in paper writing, which lead to papers getting [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] is a nice link to seven common mistakes in paper writing, which lead to papers getting [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on not all literature ‘reviews’ are the same by Nolu</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/#comment-9320</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nolu]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 09:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2096#comment-9320</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This a good food for thought at all stages of engaging with literature review in my struggle for PhD proposal writing for some time now. Tough time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This a good food for thought at all stages of engaging with literature review in my struggle for PhD proposal writing for some time now. Tough time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on self packaging &#8211; when is enough already? by the seeker</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/self-packaging-when-is-enough/#comment-9316</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[the seeker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 08:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2072#comment-9316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reblogged this on &lt;a href=&quot;http://dailylight.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/self-packaging-when-is-enough-already/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lectio Divina, or daily seeings&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reblogged this on <a href="http://dailylight.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/self-packaging-when-is-enough-already/" rel="nofollow">Lectio Divina, or daily seeings</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on not all literature ‘reviews’ are the same by pat thomson</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/#comment-9315</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pat thomson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 07:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2096#comment-9315</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yep]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on not all literature ‘reviews’ are the same by the seeker</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/#comment-9314</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[the seeker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 07:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2096#comment-9314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reblogged this on &lt;a href=&quot;http://dailylight.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lectio Divina, or daily seeings&lt;/a&gt;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reblogged this on <a href="http://dailylight.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/" rel="nofollow">Lectio Divina, or daily seeings</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on seven reasons why journals reject papers by pat thomson</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/seven-reasons-why-paper-are-rejected-by-journals/#comment-9313</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pat thomson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 05:32:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2090#comment-9313</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s important not to conflate style with Everything. There is very little in the seven points Ive listed that relates to Swords notions of style. It would be possible to meet my seven  points both stylishly and in the more usual academic prose. Stylishness is all not be same as boundary challenging thoughts and neither stylishness nor boundary challenging is necessarily the same as creativity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s important not to conflate style with Everything. There is very little in the seven points Ive listed that relates to Swords notions of style. It would be possible to meet my seven  points both stylishly and in the more usual academic prose. Stylishness is all not be same as boundary challenging thoughts and neither stylishness nor boundary challenging is necessarily the same as creativity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on seven reasons why journals reject papers by juliamolinari</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/seven-reasons-why-paper-are-rejected-by-journals/#comment-9308</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[juliamolinari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 21:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2090#comment-9308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, like Angelaki (http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/cang20/current), perhaps. But will scientists read it, and social scientists? If academics are required to publish in high impact journals, and these high impact journals are imposing conventions which arguably rein in creative, boundary-challenging thoughts, then what incentive is there to push the boundaries that Helen Sword is inviting us to push? It seems to me that only when you reach academic diva status can you push the limits. Yet unless students and academics transgress in the process of knowledge transformation, they can&#039;t think and propose anything new.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, like Angelaki (<a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/cang20/current" rel="nofollow">http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/cang20/current</a>), perhaps. But will scientists read it, and social scientists? If academics are required to publish in high impact journals, and these high impact journals are imposing conventions which arguably rein in creative, boundary-challenging thoughts, then what incentive is there to push the boundaries that Helen Sword is inviting us to push? It seems to me that only when you reach academic diva status can you push the limits. Yet unless students and academics transgress in the process of knowledge transformation, they can&#8217;t think and propose anything new.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on seven reasons why journals reject papers by pat thomson</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/seven-reasons-why-paper-are-rejected-by-journals/#comment-9307</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pat thomson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 20:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2090#comment-9307</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You have to pick the journal that will allow experimentation. There are some. It&#039;s also different for people who are experienced academics Im afraid. The object for doc researchers and ECRs is to get published surely. I think it&#039;s rather problematic if experienced academics expect the most vulnerable researchers to do the trail blazing. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have to pick the journal that will allow experimentation. There are some. It&#8217;s also different for people who are experienced academics Im afraid. The object for doc researchers and ECRs is to get published surely. I think it&#8217;s rather problematic if experienced academics expect the most vulnerable researchers to do the trail blazing. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on seven reasons why journals reject papers by juliamolinari</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/seven-reasons-why-paper-are-rejected-by-journals/#comment-9306</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[juliamolinari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 20:46:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2090#comment-9306</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How does everything that has just been said square with these words by Helen Sword:

 &quot;Academic writers often assume that they have to produce a
particular style of prose because peer-reviewers and editors will accept nothing else.
But many journal editors want to push against disciplinary boundaries and reach out
to  a wider  audience;  they  actively welcome  articles written  ‘in  an  accessible,  but
rigorous, style  that  is  likely  to engage  those without a specialist  interest  in  the  topic
being discussed’ (Studies in Higher Education submission guidelines). The status quo
will  begin  to  shift  only when more  and more  academics  dare  to write  differently,
replacing  impersonal  research  reports with  real-life  stories  about  students,  teachers
and researchers (human beings!) engaged in the challenging, frustrating, exhilarating
work of higher education.&quot; (&#039;Writing higher education differently: a manifesto on style&#039;, 2009, Studies in Higher Education, 34 (3)

Who is allowed to push against those disciplinary boundaries? Which disciplines allow such creative subversion? And why? The following book advocates a similar manifesto, but if journals are going to reject this academic flair, what&#039;s the point? http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/student-writing-and-genre-9781441171610/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How does everything that has just been said square with these words by Helen Sword:</p>
<p> &#8220;Academic writers often assume that they have to produce a<br />
particular style of prose because peer-reviewers and editors will accept nothing else.<br />
But many journal editors want to push against disciplinary boundaries and reach out<br />
to  a wider  audience;  they  actively welcome  articles written  ‘in  an  accessible,  but<br />
rigorous, style  that  is  likely  to engage  those without a specialist  interest  in  the  topic<br />
being discussed’ (Studies in Higher Education submission guidelines). The status quo<br />
will  begin  to  shift  only when more  and more  academics  dare  to write  differently,<br />
replacing  impersonal  research  reports with  real-life  stories  about  students,  teachers<br />
and researchers (human beings!) engaged in the challenging, frustrating, exhilarating<br />
work of higher education.&#8221; (&#8216;Writing higher education differently: a manifesto on style&#8217;, 2009, Studies in Higher Education, 34 (3)</p>
<p>Who is allowed to push against those disciplinary boundaries? Which disciplines allow such creative subversion? And why? The following book advocates a similar manifesto, but if journals are going to reject this academic flair, what&#8217;s the point? <a href="http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/student-writing-and-genre-9781441171610/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/student-writing-and-genre-9781441171610/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on not all literature ‘reviews’ are the same by juliamolinari</title>
		<link>http://patthomson.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/not-all-literature-reviews-are-the-same/#comment-9297</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[juliamolinari]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patthomson.wordpress.com/?p=2096#comment-9297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you! 
I think I&#039;m a #4,
Julia]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you!<br />
I think I&#8217;m a #4,<br />
Julia</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>