Best Practices with Mobile Tech: #adjunctchat Tuesday, July 15

Mobile Technology is here to stay.  It is a fact of academic life.

Many of us may try to resist integrating mobile technology into our classrooms. However, the fact is that it is now a part of our students' lives and it is something as teachers we need to think about whether we work in a traditional classroom or online. What are some ways in which mobile technology has changed the classroom?

First, there is the positive ways. Students have access to information on their mobile devises which can broaden the curriculum. Instructors no longer have to rely on outdated information and can bring in topical issues. This is true of all majors. Another advantage is that higher education students can be sent out of the classroom to learn, observe, and experience what they are learning in context. I often use my class time to send students out and observe while keeping in touch via mobile technology. Using technology in the classroom also helps the instructor to give instant feedback as students work in class. I am able to point to different resources or help students learn how to navigate through information, developing their information literacy, communication, and critical thinking skills.

Outside of class, students can contact their instructor or TA outside of office hours. This is especially important for adjuncts and contingent faculty who may not have access to offices or private spaces for discussion. And new mobile technologies allow for more natural conversation through facetime, skype, or google hangouts. I also am able to update my students, giving them access, through mobile apps for programs such as Trello.com, edmodo, googledocs, youtube or blackboard, to updated resources, feedback, and assignments. Finally, for "temporary" faculty, students can maintain a relationship once a faculty member has left the university. Social networking sites such as facebook or linkedin allows faculty to maintain that relationship which can be a reciprocal relationship for graduate school and employment. I will check in with my former students when I'm revising my classes to get real world feedback so my course stays relevant.

However, more often than not, faculty know the downside of mobile technology. Students become distracted with their technology and social media, neither listening to the instructor or classmates (if they do happen to be focusing on class work) nor being engaged in the class (checking email, messages, or facebook or even studying for another class). For an instructor it is difficult to know when a student is taking notes on their mobile device or communicating with someone outside of class (although grins during a discussion of marketing law are a dead give away).

There are also technology difficulties, such as the digital divide (those who have more advanced technology compared to those that don't), power outages, access to wifi (or lack of access), lack of support for individual devices, and incompatibility with other digital devices. Many faculty members are not confident to use technology that they either are unfamiliar with or have no academic support for. In addition, designing activities for effective use of mobile technology in the classroom may be time consuming as there may be technology testing and training used. For example, there are different designs for smartphone use, tablets, and laptops. Smartphones require a different format than computer based content. In addition, each screen shot on a small mobile device can be linked but normally can't be seen as a whole product.

Finally, the ability for students to reach an instructor 24/7 can lead to an adjunct or part-time instructor interacting with students above and beyond the time for which they are paid. Students rarely distinguish between a tenured, full-time, or part-time instructor and may expect unlimited access.

In this week's #adjunctchat, we will trade some best practices for using mobile technology (m-learning) both in traditional classes and online classes. We will look at the use of mobile technology in academics as a whole and the challenges for adjuncts specifically.

1) Do you allow the use of mobile technology in your courses? Why or why not?
2) What are some challenges in using mobile technology (especially for adjuncts/contingent faculty)
3) How might you integrate mobile technology into your teaching?
4) What boundaries do/might you need to create for effective use of mobile technology with your students?
5) What resources would you like to have when developing activities, resources, instructional design, technology for mobile use in the classroom?

This discussion is open to anyone interested in mobile technology in the classroom. I'll try to put up some links of examples I've used in my classes.

Adjuncts doing research Adjunctchat April 8

One of the common myths in society is that only tenure track faculty or Phd students who are forced to do research are doing so at universities.  In fact, many adjuncts either want to or are doing research, in some cases on their own, in other cases as part of a full time job out of the academy.

However, there are a number of issues that come up. If adjuncts aren't being paid for the work, then should they have control over their work? If that is the case, do they have to get approval from the IRB if they aren't using students as participants? How do they handle "school affiliation" that a growing number of journals require when they they have conducted the research over two or more different locations?  How can adjuncts  overcome their "research itch?"  

In this week's adjunctchat, we'll be discussing how adjuncts can do research, get funding, and trouble shoot problems if they want to continue doing research (inside and outside academia).

Teaching undergrads how to write an analysis.

My students have been accepted into our university through a competitive vetting process. Many are top in their schools which vary from large urban, to small rural, to large centralized rural, to small town, to well-endowed suburban. They are the product of the current testing environment of K-12 which in New York state means they have had to write essays since 3rd grade (whether it is developmentally appropriate is another question). So I would expect that they would have at least minimally good writing skills. While many are able to string together content in a grammatically correct manner, over the last five years I have noticed their perplexed looks when I ask them to write an analysis. They can report, they can describe, but they have not been trained to analyze and support their writing with relevant examples and content from assigned readings.

So this year, I decided I would teach all my classes how to write an analysis. This is the type of writing businesses are complaining graduates are lacking. After reading Deanna Mascle's lastest blog post asking what we as teachers are doing to teach writing, I decided to share the document I created to help explain to my students how to write an analysis. Feel free to share this.

How to write an effective analysis

An analysis takes concepts we’ve learned in class and the assigned readings and applies them to activities we do in class. In the analysis you will:

• Draw some of your own conclusions
• Support those conclusions with examples from the readings and your own experience

This is probably different from other academic writing you have done which either is a description or a reflection (your own opinion). However, this is a very important skill to have when you enter the workforce.

Process

As you do the assigned reading for class, identify some of the key concepts from the reading. You may note these down on evernote, word, or a trello.com card. After you have completed the readings assigned for the analysis, review your notes. Are there any common themes? You may come up with 1-3 themes for the readings as a whole.

Example: Group development is difficult; communication can make or break a group; getting things done in a group is complex.

Once you have your theme, review your readings again and identify what the authors have written about your theme. Identify specific examples/quotes from the reading that discuss the theme and highlight them. Now reviewing the highlighted section, think of your experience both in class and outside of class. What conclusions can you draw about the content learned in class in relation to those themes you identified? You may find that the readings contradict themselves or your experience. What is your explanation for this?

Example: Teams that work on a structured task may not go through stages of development, but teams that are working on more social tasks will. According to Tuckman, our group activity should not have been easy to accomplish because our group was in the forming stage (one of Tuckman’s stages). However, we were able to accomplish it because we have worked on similar projects in the past. Our group was more like Gersick’s teams because our task was so structured. So the communication did not rely on our feelings towards the other team members but rather we shared specific information to achieve the task.

You should integrate all of the assigned readings into the analysis.

Some guidelines

If you use information from one of the readings, you should identify it (for the analysis you may, but don’t have to, formally cite the information, but you must identify the author’s name as in the example above*.)

1)Don’t describe or reword the reading. However, you may use quotes or identify concepts from the reading.

Poor example: (Don’t do this)
Tuckman’s 5 stages of group development are forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjoining. In forming, groups will introduce each other.

Notice this does not have any examples that demonstrates that you understand what happens in each stage, nor does it have any of author’s conclusions about group formation and communication.

Good example: (Do this)
Groups communicate differently as they develop as Tuckman observed. Our group started off introducing ourselves and tried to learn about each others strengths and weaknesses.

In this example, the author identifies Tuckman’s article and gives examples that support the author’s conclusion that groups communicate like Tuckman wrote.

2)Don’t just give your opinion. You want to put in your analysis, but your analysis should be based on experience and your understanding of the reading.

Poor example: (Don’t do this)
I think groups should introduce themselves to get the group going. We did this and it helped us to complete the activity.

There is no supporting information from the reading, nor is there anything about conclusions the author has made about group communication.

Good example: (Do this)
As Tuckman wrote in his article, introducing yourself to your group members helps to set the atmosphere for effective group communication from the beginning. Setting this atmosphere helps to establish trust. When we did our first activity, we started to create trust using the same methods outlined in Antony’s article (establishing rules for speaking, setting an agenda, giving due dates).

Notice how the author gives the opinion that setting the atmosphere created trust, but supported it with information from both readings and the group’s experience.

3)Make sure your writing uses college level writing standards including, making sure the paper is typed (double spaced), stapled or paper clipped, proper grammar, paragraphs, capitalization and punctuation. Also, you should check for spelling errors, sentence structure (no fragments or run on sentences). Any information taken word for word from a reading should be in quotes with the page number following.

Remember to put your name and the class number at the top. You may also want to number the pages in case pages fall off.

Getting Started

Often students ask me how to begin. One way to start your analysis is to develop a research question which your analysis will answer. It is possible that an instructor may give you the "prompt" to use, but most of the time we will only give you a topic. So take that topic and create a question that you think the professor or you want to answer about that topic. The best questions will use question words such as how or why. These question words will help you to write a paper that is more than just a description. You can also use that question to begin a conversation with your instructor if you are not sure you have understood the assignment. An instructor will know what you are thinking of if you bring a How or Why question than it you say simply, I don't understand the assignment.

For example: Topic is group communication in teamwork.

A good question: How does group communication help or hinder a team's work processes? Why do some types of group communication help a team to be productive and others hinder it?

A poor question: What is good communication? Does group communication help teamwork?

Notice in the poor questions that the answer would tend to be simple and descriptive, whereas the good questions require you to think and make some generalizations about the topic.

Notes: *While an academic paper would require formal citations, I'm trying to teach my students how to write a "professional" analysis that may be used in the workplace. Most workplaces would not require (or even want) formal citations with a full bibliography, however, I think it is important to train students to identify where their information is coming from. This means they should use a modified citation in which the author and perhaps date are identified in text or as a "source". For some of my writing assignments I do require an approved citation method, which most are adept at (at least in one method, either MLA or University of Chicago).

#adjunctchat November 10, 2013: Managing your commitments at the end of the semester

This is the time of year when the walls begin to close in. Not only might you be finishing the semester, getting semester grades in, preparing for the holidays, and in many cases juggling multiple workplaces. Perhaps you have a full time job which now requires an end of the year report, or you are responsible for a quarterly AND annual report for research funders. An added stress for the adjunct is IF you have a job next semester, what will you be teaching (is it new or do you need to dust off and update a course you've taught before).

On top of this, this is the time of year that there are stronger family pressures, either due to travel to be with family, attending children's performances (if you have children or other young relatives), etc...

This week we will be discussing strategies to manage the commitments so we can enjoy this time of year. Among the questions will be:

1) How do you prioritize work commitments?
2) Are there devises (including social media) which could make your work flow easier?
3) How do you balance work and personal time commitments?

Hope you can make it tomorrow (Tuesday, Dec. 10, at 4PM Eastern Standard Time) and we will keep it to 1/2 hr for all of us pressed for time!

Tips on revision: The final edit

The final edits

These last suggestions are based on my experience as a peer reviewer for a journal and a writing teaching. I find that changing writing mode helps to pinpoint mistakes. I usually print out a hard copy to review. I ALWAYS find mistakes on print even if I have reviewed a paper digitally numerous times. The following are some of the more common mistakes I often see:

1) Make sure you review the style standards. This includes paragraphs, headings, and reference styles. Working across disciplines, I am familiar with the various styles you may be asked to use. if no style has been chosen, choose one style and stick with it. Often, though, there is a document you can model.

2) Make sure you paragraphs are not too long. I often read papers with page long paragraphs; this is too long. Review your document to see if you can break up overly long paragraphs.

3) Review, check, and recheck references in text and your reference list at the end of your writing. I usually do this with a partner to make sure I don't miss something. I will have them read out a citation which I check against my reference list, making notes on adjustments as I go.

4) Check figures, tables, and illustrations and their headings. Make sure they are close enough to the copy and/or there are references to them.

5) Check for orphaned lines/headings. One of my pet peeves is to have a heading end a page.

6) Write for scanning and search. Don't forget to include relevant key words. Also make sure a paper or report or even dissertation/thesis has enough sections and headings. Most people today don't have a lot of time. So the first thing they do is scan. This is where graphics, headings, subheadings, and short paragraphs help. If writing is too dense, you'll lose the reader from the very beginning.

7) Set a deadline. I mentioned this in my first post on revision tips and it is especially important as you end the revision process. Allow yourself only a short time to make revisions (i.e. 2 weeks). This will help prevent you from overthinking your revisions and trying to create the "perfect paper" which never gets published or presented to the appropriate audiences. You may need to make revisions a 2nd or 3rd time, but leave that decision up to the reviewers.

Tips on revision: Troubleshooting sections Conclusion

The conclusion

The conclusion is perhaps one of the hardest things to write; revision is even more difficult. As I mentioned in the Abstract section, the conclusion is tied closely to the abstract. If you are having difficulty revising the conclusion, try writing the abstract first. Then go back to writing the conclusion. This is especially useful if you have to cut out words. By keeping your conclusion close to the abstract, you conclusion becomes more focused.

So let's just review the purpose of the conclusion. The conclusion is the last thing your readers will read. However, realize also that many readers will stop reading at the findings/discussion. So while it is important to have a conclusion, it is not important to put in too much. Also, the conclusion should reinforce your message/thesis that you established throughout the paper. If you have hypotheses, it should summarize what your research has found. Therefore, the conclusion should 1) match your introduction and body, 2)NOT have new information, and 3)be easy to skim for key ideas.

Anything that does not align with what you have written in the rest of the paper or ADDS information should be cut from the conclusion. It is especially important to see if your summary in the conclusion aligns with your stated goals for the piece you are writing set out in the introduction. If you have stated that your research is going to answer questions, have you done so? If so, what are the answers? If not, why not? (There are times when more questions come out of research than answers or failed research adds to lit but does not answer questions). If you state that you are going to present a theoretical framework, did you do so? Did you explain the relevance or use of that framework to the field? If you have hypotheses, have you summarized the results in one or two lines? If there are hypotheses you were unable to confirm, have you explained why?

The final two lines or so should let the reader know what you want them to do with your research. If you receive comments like "How is this relevant" or "Not sure this research is useful", you have not let the reader know what the relevance is for them. If you want them to use the framework, for example, to conduct further research, you need to state that. For proposals and reports, you need to tell the reader what you expect their next step will be and how the report or proposal is relevant (will support the reader's work). This will be the last thing they read and you want it to be fixed in their mind.

Tips on revision: Troubleshooting sections: Body of writing and visuals

Body of writing

Academic writing, whether it be papers, books, dissertations, reports, or even proposals, need to prove that research and data is relevant, reliable, and representative. The body is where an academic does this. So if there are questions about your research, you need to determine if 1) you have described your data, analysis, and methodology in a way that the reader/reviewer understands (easily rectified if you haven't) or 2)the reviewer/reader has problems with your data, analysis, methodology, or underlining theories (harder to rectify).

In the first case, one recommendation I had in revising my dissertation was to write as if I were giving the reader instructions on how to replicate my work if they wanted to do the research themselves. Often we assume readers understand the methodology we use when in fact they may not. I have often had to look up the methodology as outlined by a specific author when reviewing articles or reports. If you don't provide citations or definitions/assumptions that have informed your research, you leave interpretation of your methodology to your reader. A good example is "grounded theory". There are many interpretations of how grounded theory can be applied. As a reader, I'd want to know what process you used and what was the basis.

In the second case, you may need to analyze where a reader might be having a problem and decide if you are going to make changes. If you decide not to make changes, you need to justify your choices to support that your research is relevant, reliable, and representative. One article I wrote was consistently being rejected by one reviewer in particular. In the end, his basic theoretical beliefs were different than ours (I had a cowriter). Because of these differences in beliefs, he would never accept any of our published material/methodology. We were pushing a new view of an established theory. However, we did realize in the first and second revisions that we needed to address the need for a new perspective and method of analysis for the readers or many would have the same reaction. We had to demonstrate first that we understood the prevailing theory and then present an argument for looking at it from a different angle. This way, the audience would not evaluate our article as being uninformed, but rather a new perspective (which they still might have disagreed with). In the end, our revised justifications for our methodology and the basis for analysis convinced the editor to publish over the opinion of the reviewer. It also helped that the other two reviewers changed their opinions about the article so that by the 3rd revision, they were strong supporters for publishing the article.

Once you have written a description of your process(es), it is important to include analysis. New writers and researchers in particular, are adverse to presenting their own interpretations. As a result, the body of a report, dissertation, article, paper, or even book becomes a compilation of facts. It is difficult to realize that feedback may want more of your educated opinion based on your analysis rather than more facts. I see this often when reading articles written by practioners or graduate students where they may not have ever been encouraged to draw their own conclusions. Going back to communication/rhetorical theory, you need to make a claim in your writing. This can be a conclusion, observation, hypothesis, or theory/model. Without the claim, your writing only is descriptive or data. If the feedback you have received includes questions such as "what does this mean?" or "how is this relevant", you have not made a strong enough claim. Likewise, if you have been asked to cite one of your own claims, then you have not made it clear to the reader that this is your claim based on your analysis. Even seasoned writers have this difficulty and you need to take possession of your original ideas in your writing.

Another related problem is supporting your claims. While you may have good reasons for making your claims, most readers will need to be guided through your thought processes for a claim. It is not enough to make a claim and follower up with data in a table. Rather, you will need to point out relevant data and how that supports your claim. If you have feedback such as "Why is this relevant?" or "Can you support this?" (even though you have listed the data), you need to work on explaining how data supports your claim.

Another aspect of revisions of the body is choice of visuals to support your written analysis. I was reminded of the APA guidelines that visuals must be relevant and augment, not replace your writing.
As the Purdue OWL says:

Visual material such as tables and figures can be used quickly and efficiently to present a large amount of information to an audience, but visuals must be used to assist communication, not to use up space, or disguise marginally significant results behind a screen of complicated statistics. Ask yourself this question first: Is the table or figure necessary? For example, it is better to present simple descriptive statistics in the text, not in a table.

Don't assume reviewers won't look at your visuals and tables. Often they will ask you to reformat, add, or delete information that is not necessary. I had to simplify a model I had for my dissertation because it was too complex to follow. Instead, I broke the model up into smaller components which my readers found easier to follow. Of course, sometimes if you have word/space constraints, your first inclination is to put everything into one visual. It is better to simplify so there is a general visual and leave the details for your text when you can relate it to your analysis. Another possibility, if you want the data accessible, is to set the data on a website which you can give readers access to through a note. On the other hand, sometimes a visual will allow you to cull full sections. I just read a revised article that used a visual to explain the various variables used in the study and their relationship to each other. The original version had the explanation in the text which covered 6-7 pages. By the end of the section, I was confused as to how the complex research all related to each other. The one visual allowed the author(s) to cut this section down to 2 pages with a visual, which gave me a better understanding of both the complexity, relationships, and structure of the study.

Tips on Revision: Trouble shooting sections: Introduction and Background/Lit review

Introduction: What goes into the introduction may vary stylistically depending on length, discipline, and purpose. However, a good introduction will allow the reader to decide if they want to continue reading. When you have been asked to revise the introduction, the first thing you need to determine is was this the result of your writing not being focused or clear enough or is this the reviewer wanting you to change direction or refocus your paper? If it is your writing, you need to go back and reread your paper, especially findings/conclusions to make sure your introduction aligns with the rest of the paper.

It might help to do your introduction revisions last. This way you can frame your paper so the reader knows what to expect. This is contrary to your first draft where you frame your paper so you can write. Revisions usually move towards the reader's ability to understand what you write. So leaving introduction revisions to the end means you have a better idea of where you want your reader to end up.

Background/literature review

Often times, we have made claims or framed our paper based on previous theories, but then find that our research does not fit with those theories. This is the section where those that must cull words can do the most culling. This is also the section where you need to craft how your research is relevant.

1) If you are using hypotheses, make sure your develop how previous research supported the development of your hypotheses. This is where you explain you logic in developing the hypothesis, supporting it with research. You don't need to include all the research you have ever read (especially if there is a word limit or the piece is shorter; this is not necessarily true for a dissertation or thesis where breadth of literature is important) but only those pieces that had the most impact on your hypothesis development.

2) If you are using research questions (usually qualitative) to organize literature, use only the research that was relevant in creating the questions or will support the questions you asked.

3) If you have findings that you did not initially anticipate, you need to go back and revise your background information to explain your findings. During my dissertation, my focus was moved from collaborative writing to knowledge creation. As a result, I had to go back and see what the literature was on knowledge creation. I realized that in reframing my question (the question was the same, the answers were different than anticipated and a different discipline explained the answers better), there were no theoretical frameworks for the type of research I was working on. I ended up creating a framework based on the literature I collected AFTER my analysis. This is not an indication that you had a problem with your initial research but rather that you kept an open mind and did not change the data to match your assumptions. This is an attribute of good research.

4) Target any new literature searches to only those areas feedback has indicated as weak. Academic writers have the tendency to want to find new literature which might take them into new areas or give them new understanding of the topics. That is fine for the first draft. But the 2nd and 3rd drafts only need research that supports or frames their hypothesis/message/research questions. One thing I've found helpful is to save new ideas/literature for future articles by writing up memos I can revisit. This way, I don't feel as if I'm missing anything.

Tips on Revision: Trouble shooting sections: Abstract/Executive summary

Troubleshooting sections

If your style is more working section by section, here are some tips for each section.

Abstract/Executive Summary: ECPublishing had a great insight into the importance of your abstract:

Make sure your abstract and title truly reflect the content of your paper and are written well. You need to sell your paper and its significance. We can’t rewrite your abstract to make it more attractive to reviewers; you need to make it concise and full of impact.

Although this is the first thing read by most readers, it is often the last thing written. Many people are afraid to give the results/conclusions of the paper because they want others to read it. However, without results/conclusions, a reader will not know if the paper is relevant. In fact, I never download a paper where I'm not sure what the results are. I tie the abstract closely with the conclusion of a paper. It forces the conclusion to be focused and it makes the abstract relevant to your paper's message. Another way to think of it is: If someone were to ask you what your paper was about and what impact it has for researchers in 5 sentences, what would you say? This is why most people say to write the abstract last.

One of the main problems in revisions, however, is that your message/conclusions and how you word them may change. If you have a teacher/supervisor/editor who wants you to shift focus, you may rewrite your conclusion. Remember to revise your abstract also.

Tips on Revision: Major revisions

Major Revisions

The first thing you must determine when faced when major revisions (including total overhaul of organization, reformulating your research, cutting out large amounts of your document) is whether to start the writing process over or try starting over. The reason most people don't do this is because they feel they will have wasted time writing the first draft. However, sometimes the structural or content changes are so major it is better to start from scratch, using the ideas and insights you created while writing your first draft.

One suggestion in starting over is to answer the question: What are the three major things I want the reader to take away from this. This is the equivalent of the 3 minute pitch. This should help you to focus your writing on only the most important elements for this one particular piece of writing. Once you have these three major points, you can use them to write your introduction. If you have specific passages that support those three points, you can cut and paste them into your new structure, but only as they support your introduction. Anything else should be excluded and saved for later. I did this for my dissertation. While editing and revision was an interesting topic, it did not fit my introduction, nor did it really answer my research questions. As a result, I am now doing further research just on that topic for a journal article.

This last suggestion also works when you need to cut a lot out to fit a required word limit. By focusing on your research questions and introduction, you can cut out parts that are not directly relevant. You need to be ruthless in your cuts, however, keep the sections for further publications.

Roles and Tasks in Academic Editing #acwrimo

We are told repeatedly that feedback in an important part of the writing process. However, very little has actually been written/researched about writing feedback (other than that it should be done). My own research has indicated that there are seven different roles an editor/reviewer can play which will result in different types of feedback. These might help when you are submitting a paper (whether to an adviser/supervisor, an editor, an instructor, or a colleague).

1) Contributor: This person adds content to your writing. This is found in collaborative writing projects, but also in some academic writing. An instructor or reviewer may require that you add something verbatim into your written product. I think of grant applications or review board/ethics forms.

2) Owner: This is the person/entity that owns your product. This could be you (as the writer), a group, your instructor, your department (for which you are writing on their behalf), your institution (especially if writing is being used to evaluate), funders, publishers, or stakeholders (especially if you are doing participatory research). According to my research, sometimes it is easier to accept criticism if ownership is not the writer per se. However, this also means the writer needs to align their writer with that of the perceived owner of the document. So outside feedback from the owner becomes even more important.

3) Approver: This is the person that has the final say. This can be group members, an instructor/adviser/supervisor, a manager, a funder, participants. The approver will give you an okay or not okay, perhaps some reasons why, but not much feedback on how to change it. Papers/writing should not be submitted to Approvers until you are almost finished, although informal conversations may be needed to make sure writer(s) are on the right track.

4) Formatter: The formatter’s job is to make sure a paper is structurally, grammatically, stylistically appropriate. Many times the formatter is the writer. However, the formatter can also be a group member, editor, or consultant used to ensure writing aligns with stylistic/language/structure in which writing is situated. For example, an American writing for a British based journal will need to check for spelling conventions. This is the “mechanics” editing many of us learn in school.

5) Gatekeeper: This person has two major roles: a) make sure the writing process progresses through to completion, and b) make sure final product meets the expectation of the audience. This person can give verbal feedback throughout the process, maintain writing tasks and draft versions, and do targeted reviews at any time in the writing process. The gatekeeper is different from the approver in that he, she, or they do not have the final say. Rather they keep the process going.

6) Negotiator: The negotiator identifies when there is ambiguity in the writing. The negotiator does not change the writing like the owner or contributor would. Rather, they give feedback on their understanding of piece and identify areas needed for clarification. Through their feedback, they help the writer(s) to develop their message and supporting information. The negotiator plays the role of the audience so the writer can understand the impact of their writing on the reader.

7) Author: The author is public face of the writer. The name(s) that go(es) on the document is author. They are ultimately responsible for the final written piece. The author can be different than the contributor (in collaborative writing, for example, the writer may just put together contributions or may have someone else who formats). However, many times the author plays many of the roles outlined above, especially for academic papers for evaluation (such as dissertation or class paper).

In analyzing these roles, the types of editing/feedback/revision tasks can be divided into formative (developing a written document), technical mechanics (structure, style, grammar), authoritative (approval), and meaning making.

It is important when asking for feedback that you identify which of these tasks you are expecting the reading to do. It is useful if you are able to identify what role you perceive the reader to have. Not only will that help guide the reader in the type of feedback you want, it also helps you choose reviewers at different stages of the writing process.

For example, asking a teacher to review one of your papers at the beginning of the writing process may not get you the formative or meaning making feedback you need. Instead, their feedback might be authoritative without the type of feedback that you need to help develop your ideas. On the other hand, expecting a friend or colleague to understand the alignment a paper needs to have with academic standards or a journal (which approvers have) means that the approval they give a paper will lack the authoritative feedback you may need. It may be better to submit a draft for preapproval feedback before it is too late to make revisions.

When, how and who to ask for academic writing feedback #acwrimo

In honor of Academic Writing Month (#acwrimo), I have decided to write a weekly series on feedback/revision/editing. This is an often overlooked, yet important, aspect of academic writing.

So now you’ve written your piece or perhaps you’re in the planning stages. It’s your work, so you want to maintain ownership. However, you also know you’re going to have to have your piece reviewed. Who do you ask? What type of feedback should you get before you submit a piece? How do you get feedback so that you maintain ownership of your scholarship, yet still are able to produce a publishable piece?

First, recognize that there is a difference between writing you do as a student compared to writing you do as a professional academic or researcher. As a student, you are writing (for the most part) to be evaluated on your knowledge of a topic. Therefore, when you write, there is a piece of you that goes into your writing. If your writing is evaluated as lacking, it reflects on you, the student. It is important as a student that you demonstrate what you know to the evaluator (teacher, evaluator(s), dissertation committee).

Professional writing, on the other hand, is to provide information/a view point/research to a readership that may be interested. As a result, peer reviewers and editors want your writing to align with the expectations of the readers. They are not looking at WHO wrote the piece, but the written piece itself. If they reject or want you to change something about your written product, they are not rejecting you as a person (many times, especially in blind reviews, they don’t even know who you are), but your writing, ideas, or the appropriateness of the writing for the audience they represent.

When to ask for feedback

This depends on how you write. I like to ask for feedback in the planning stages. I know of colleagues that send ideas to publishers and editors to ensure it is viable or get suggestions on how to frame a piece of writing for a particular audience. This can save you a lot of editing in the long run. On the other hand, if you are someone prone to writer’s block, this type of feedback could build the wall up to reinforce the writer’s block.

Book writing is very different than article writing. Often you need to submit an outline which includes an audience and justification for publishing. This is when feedback from colleagues or others in your profession come in handy. Identify some experts to submit your outline to for feedback. If you are in a very competitive discipline send them the general concept (as opposed to a fully developed proposal). Their feedback can then become part of your proposal.

Before you submit a first draft, have someone unfamiliar with the topic review what you’ve written. They can assess the clarity of your writing without having to analyze your content. Then you may want an expert to review your piece for the content/theoretical basis. It helps to identify for your editor/reader what you want them to look for. If you don’t ask them to correct typos or grammatical errors, don’t expect that they will do so.

Finally, expect you will need to make revisions. Sometimes this helps take the pressure off to be perfect which can create writer block. If the draft you submit is not perfect, don’t worry. Even if you think it’s perfect, most likely the peer reviewers will have suggestions. Don’t take this feedback for publication personally as the reviewer is probably just trying to align your writing to reader expectations. Once you get suggestion back, review each piece of feedback. It is not necessary that you make changes for everything suggested by reviewers. Rather, think of what they are saying and keep those things that you feel are important to keep. If you have reviewers that are contradicting in their feedback, work with the editor to determine what he or she wants you to do. The editor has the final say.

Conclusion

So, 1) Don't be afraid to ask for feedback at any time during the writing process;
2) You don't have to accept everything a reviewer suggests, but you do need to consider his or her comments and be able to justify your choices;
3) Have at least one person who knows nothing about your topic review your writing for clarity;
4) During the formative writing process, tell your reviewers/readers what you want them to focus on in their feedback;
5) Don't take feedback personally, especially if you are writing for publication.

Where do lost ideas go?

The summer is usually when I do my best blog posts. This summer (the first as a "Doctor" in which I will not be working on my dissertation), I am using my time to apply for jobs. This is very time consuming as there are many different requirements schools demand depending on the position. One of the jobs I am applying to is as instructor in writing and critical inquiry. Most writing positions demand a writing sample (which I'm having difficulty identifying as to what is relevant). So I decided to revise one of my previous blog posts.

Where do lost ideas go?

My process for writing my dissertation makes me wonder about what happens to ideas that are created and then lost while I write. I try to write at least two hours a day. When writing at home, I am often interrupted. As a result, I find I have to continually read what I have written and try to capture the thought I had. However, as I am creating the knowledge, what happens if it is lost? Was it truly an important thought? Upon rereading what I have written (in order to recapture an idea I might have lost), might I not create a deeper understanding of what I am writing? And where does that idea go that was lost? Is that lost knowledge? Or is it just part of the process of idea generation and knowledge building?

I occasionally see this with my own students, who have created a speech using PowerPoint. In their presentations, they will sometimes forget to mention something and may go back to it. I am continually asking them, however, how important that piece of information is for the audience to understand the speech. If speaker has forgotten to present a specific piece of information, perhaps it is not really necessary for the audience. The speakers may still have that knowledge in their head which allows them to understand what they are saying. In fact, that specific piece of information was a building block for presenters as they were creating their speech (and a basis for their speech as a whole), but the knowledge may not be necessary for the audience to understand the speech.

I think of it like a building that is built on the ruins of others. The original building creates a foundation and even a structure upon which a new building can be constructed. However, it is not necessary that the new building be constructed exactly the same as the original. More often than not it is improved upon, creating its own flavor or style. It is a unique creation in the end, which also can be built upon. This is the same for edits or lost versions of anything that we write. We may have a structure or framework from which to work, but our ideas evolve and become unique as we revise our writing (or try to reconstruct documents that have been lost because of computer glitches!).

It is difficult to let go of the lost ideas, just as it is difficult to create something new rather than going back to the original design. The process as we discard, change, and/or create something new helps us to have a deeper understanding in general of the topic. Writing helps us document our thinking, although not all thoughts will be put down. This might be the underlying reason for why project based learning creates a deeper level of learning than can be measured in a finished product or even a test.