This document provides information about an academic writing course. The course aims to help participants become better academic writers through discussing writing principles and practicing writing techniques. It will cover recognizing good writing, becoming more productive writers, self-evaluation, peer feedback, and writing reviews. Assessment includes class participation, a group presentation analyzing example papers, submitting a revised introduction and reflection essay, and individually reviewing a book on academic writing. The schedule outlines weekly readings and writing assignments to help participants develop their skills in literature reviews, peer reviews, structure, clarity and other aspects of academic writing.

1. Academic Writing as Craft
Nanyang Business School
Instructor: Julien CAYLA
Course description
Writing is how we communicate our ideas. Writing is how we establish our research reputation.
At the same time, writing can become a source of angst for academics, especially for doctoral
students and junior faculty.
Writing anxiety sets in precisely because academics are expected to write and publish regularly.
Yet very few doctoral programs offer formal training in this domain. This oversight is
problematic, given the importance of good writing for academic success.
This course is designed to make writing more conscious and fun. We will do this not only by
talking about writing but also by writing together. I am hoping you will enjoy this writing journey
we are about to embark upon.
Learning outcomes
Upon completion of the course participants should be able to:
1. recognize the principles of good academic writing,
2. use various tools and techniques to become more productive writers
3. be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of their own writing.
4. be able to provide valuable feedback to others
5. be able to write scholarly reviews
6. Reflect on the practical and ethical dimensions of academic publishing
1

2. Component ILO
Tested
Weighting Team/Individual Assessment
Rubrics
Class
participation
ILO1-3 20% Individual Appendix 1
Group
presentation
ILO1-3
ILO1-2
20% Team Appendix 2
Reflection
essay
ILO1-2 30% Individual Appendix 3
Book review ILO1-2 30% Individual Appendix 4
Total 100%
Description of Assessment Methods
Class Participation (20%)
During our seminars, you will be called upon randomly to share your views on various issues
related to academic writing. You are expected to: 1) have read all materials assigned; 2) be
prepared to comment on the readings. High marks will be awarded to students who get
involved in class discussions by volunteering well-prepared answers, asking insightful questions,
or offering divergent yet relevant viewpoints to advance our discussions (see appendix 1 for
evaluation criteria).
Group Presentation (20%)
At the beginning of the semester you will form a group of 2 to 3 with people, preferably with
people from your own discipline. You will then have to pick two articles which illustrate bad
academic writing and two articles that for you illustrate good writing. Preferably, these should
be from one particular field (e.g. operations; finance; marketing).
As a group, you will have to analyse these four papers. You will have to 1) justify why these
articles are good examples of good/bad writing; 2) suggest ways that they could be improved; 3)
what you can learn from them, in terms of academic writing, about what to do and what not to
do, and how you could apply these learnings in your writing. In terms of format, you will have
to develop a presentation of 15 minutes with your key learnings to share with the rest of the
class. Format is flexible (powerpoint; handout etc.). See appendix 2 for evaluation criteria. No
need to submit your presentation.
2

3. Book review (30%)
At the beginning of the semester you will have to select and procure a book about academic
writing. You will have to choose from the list in appendix 5. Most of these books are available at
the library.
You can also select another book about academic writing, after consulting with the instructor.
You will have to write a review of the book highlighting 1) key learnings from the book; 2) how
the lessons of the book could help you with your own writing. You will have to submit this 1000
words essay on NTU Learn before class on week 10. You will also have to present your key
learnings in class in a 10-15 minute presentation in week 10 (see schedule below).
Reflection essay (30%) : Participants will submit a written assignment at the end of the course.
Participants will edit two pages of the introduction they submitted in week 4. They should also
write a critical essay reflecting on how they edited it. They will draw on the course literature and
learnings they have accumulated to reflect on their editing process. The reflection essay itself
should be no more than 1,000 words, excluding the original and edited text. Submit in one
document with a cover page bearing your name 1) your original introduction; 2) your revised
introduction; 3) your reflection essay (see appendix 4 for evaluation criteria). This is due on NTU
Learn before the last class on week 13.
READINGS
We will be reading, in its entirety: Helen Sword, Air & Light & Time & Space, Harvard UP (2017).
In the weekly assignment schedule below, this book is listed as “ALTS.” Other readings listed
below will be provided on NTU Learn
___________________________________________________________________________
SCHEDULE
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 1: Academic Writing as a Craft
Readings:
· Sword, ALTS (Epigraph, preface, introduction)
· Ericsson, K. A., Prietula, M. J., & Cokely, E. T. (2007). The making of an expert.
Harvard business review, 85(7/8), 114.
Assignment:
· Complete Introductory Survey : https://writersdiet.com/base/base/
3

4. · Each student needs to pick a book on academic writing that they will review for the
end of the semester. I have included a list in appendix but you can also choose
another book after consultation with the instructor during class. Your choice should
be finalized before the second class.
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 2: Artisanal habits I: Writing a good literature review
Mandatory reading
· Boote, David N., and Penny Beile (2015), “Scholars before researchers: On the
centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation,” Educational
researcher 34, (6), 3-15.
Optional readings
1. Fisch, C., & Block, J. (2018). Six tips for your (systematic) literature review in business
and management research. Management Review Quarterly, 68(2), 103-106.
2. Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the
dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational researcher, 34(6),
3-15.
Exercise:
Read the following article and analyze how the literature review was constructed. Is this a good
literature review? Why?
Warren, Caleb, and Margaret C. Campbell (2014), “What makes things cool? How
autonomy influences perceived coolness." Journal of Consumer Research 41 (2), 543-563
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 3: Artisanal habits II-Writing good peer reviews
Readings:
1. Bagchi, R., Block, L., Hamilton, R. W., & Ozanne, J. L. (2017). A Field Guide for
the Review Process: Writing and Responding to Peer Reviews. Journal of
Consumer Research, 43(5), 860-872.
2. Lepak, D. 2009. Editor's comments: What is good reviewing? Academy of
Management Review, 34: 375-381.
4

5. 3. “Reclaiming the Body I Was Born Into: Tough Mudder and the Quest for
Painful Consumption Experiences, working paper.
Writing assignment:
Pretend that you were assigned to review my paper (“Reclaiming the Body I Was Born Into:
Tough Mudder and the Quest for Painful Consumption Experiences”) for the Journal of
Consumer Research ”(available on NTU Learn). Your review should: (a) briefly summarize the
intended contribution of the paper and what the paper shows; (b) note the strengths of the
paper; and (c) discuss the concerns you have with the paper; and (d) give advice about how to
address these concerns. You can check the specific criteria applied to consumer culture theory
papers here: https://consumerresearcher.com/cct-papers.
In terms of deliverables, to submit this exercise and other exercises we do in class, you should
create a google doc, and email the link to me at jcayla@ntu.edu.sg
I will not be able to give you feedback every week but from time to time I will give you feedback
on your work to help you improve your writing.
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 4: Behavioral and Social Habits
Readings:
Sword, ALTS (Part I: Behavioral Habits, pp. 11-56)
Writing assignment:
· Read the review package of my first round submission of “Reclaiming the Body I Was
Born Into”(available on NTU Learn). Now write a letter to my co-authors and
highlight in your letter (which should be about two pages) which of the reviewers’
criticisms you find most useful, and which you find to be less useful, undoable or
even unnecessary. Which ones would you prioritize? Suggest a path forward to revise
the manuscript. Write this on your “Exercises” google doc and be prepared to discuss
in class.
· Email an introduction of your paper to your accountability partner / group. This is
the opening of your paper. It should introduce your research, explain the
contribution, and give readers a reason to read the rest of your paper. Most
introductions are one or two double-spaced pages, although they may need to be
shorter or longer, depending on your research and intended outlet.
5

6. ___________________________________________________________________________
Week 5 Artisanal habits III: Clarity
Readings:
1. Sword, ALTS (Part II: Artisanal Habits, pp. 57-102)
2. Warren, Nooshin L., Matthew Farmer, Tianyu Gu, and Caleb Warren. "Marketing ideas:
How to write research articles that readers understand and cite." Journal of Marketing
85, no. 5 (2021): 42-57.
3. Ragins, B. R. (2012). Reflections on the craft of clear writing. Academy of Management
Review, 37, 493-501
Writing assignment:
· Submit an outline of your paper to your accountability partner
· Email feedback on your accountability partner’s introduction (submitted the week
before), before class .
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 6: Artisanal habits IV-Structure
This session will happen online and will be delivered by a guest speaker, Tanvi Mehta, who is an
academic editor and a coach: https://www.mehtatext.com/
Readings:
· Hayot, E. (2014). Chapter 8, “The uneven U” The Elements of Academic Style. In The
Elements of Academic Style. Columbia University Press
· Watch this video on the uneven u:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMk86KRLnxU
Writing assignment:
Submit your theoretical foundations / literature review section to your accountability partner.
This is the part of the paper between the introduction and the methods section. In this section,
you should review the relevant literature and state your hypotheses and/or research objectives.
6

7. ___________________________________________________________________________
Week 7: Artisanal habits V-Research as Storytelling
Readings:
1. Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory
development. Academy of management review, 32(4), 1265-1281.
2. Pollock, T. G., & Bono, J. E. (2013). Being Scheherazade: The importance of storytelling in
academic writing. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3), 629-634.
Assignment:
· Email feedback on your accountability partner / group theoretical foundations
(submitted the week before), before class.
· Email a methods section to your accountability partner. Your method section should
explain how you collected your data or plan to collect your data. If your paper
includes multiple studies, submit the method section for one of the studies. If you
are not planning to collect data, then this section should describe your analytic
strategy and/or explain your model.
___________________________________________________________________________
Recess Week
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 8: Guest speaker (Online)
Our guest speaker this week, Rachel Kyne, obtained her PhD in English from the University of
Chicago in 2017 and has taught academic writing and English at universities in the U.S., France,
and Canada since 2012. She is also a professional developmental editor, copyeditor, and second
reader for academics. She holds a Masters in English and Creative Writing from Concordia
University in Montreal, Canada, and pursues her own writing practice.
Readings:
· Prose, F. (2012). “Sentences” in Reading like a writer: A guide for people who love
books and for those who want to write them. Union Books, pp. 36-62
-Ezra klein ‘on genre’
Assignment:
7

8. Submit a findings section. This section should describe the results of your analysis. If you have
not collected data yet, then make up results for the purpose of this exercise. Email it to your
accountability partner.
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 9: Navigating the emotions of academic writing
Readings:
· Sword, ALTS (Part IV: Emotional Habits, pp. 147-194)
· Horn, S. A. (2016). The social and psychological costs of peer review: Stress and
coping with manuscript rejection. Journal of Management Inquiry, 25(1), 11-26.
· Day, N. E. (2011). The silent majority: Manuscript rejection and its impact on
scholars. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10 (4), 704-718.
Writing assignment:
Submit a General Discussion section. In this section, you should: (a) briefly review your results,
(b) explain how they contribute to theory, practice, or (ideally) both, and (c) discuss how you
could extend your research (i.e., limitations and future directions).
Email feedback on your accountability partner / group findings section (submitted the week
before), before class.
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 10: Books about academic writing
Each student will do a 10-15 minute presentation of the book they have read, focusing on their
key learnings (see instructions above on the book review).
Writing assignment: Before our session email your comments about the discussion section to
your accountability partner (s).
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 11 Editing and Revising
Readings
8

9. Goodson, P. (2016). Becoming an academic writer: 50 exercises for paced, productive, and
powerful writing. Ch. 6: “Edit and Proofread.”
Writing assignment: before our session submit a full paper to your accountability partner.
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 12 Good and bad academic writing
Presentation: During this session, each group will have 15-20 minutes to present and review
examples of good / bad academic writing, preferably in their own field.
Writing assignment : Before our session, submit a detailed review of the paper of your
accountability partner, bearing in mind the principles of good academic reviewing we saw in
week 2. This document should be between 1000 and 1500 words
___________________________________________________________________________
Week 13 Wrapping up
This last session will be used to 1) gather key learnings ; 2) for students to implement the
feedback received in week 12 from their accountability partner
9

10. 10

11. Appendix 1: Assessment Criteria for Participation
Traits Performance
1 2 3
Engagement
Hardly focuses in class (e.g.
using mobile phone,
unnecessary chatting)
Occasionally engages in
distracting activities (e.g.
using mobile phone,
unnecessary chatting) in
class.
Engages fully in class
Contribution
frequency Does not speak
up/contribute in class
Occasionally speaks
up/contributes in class
Speaks up/contributes in all
classes
Contribution
quality No
contributions/Contribution
s lack substance
Contributions
demonstrate knowledge
of subject matter
Contributions are constructive
and insightful
11

12. Appendix 2: Assessment Criteria for Group Presentations
Traits Performance
Ability to identify good
writing Not Yet
Content is erroneous or irrelevant; Lack of
depth in content and little insights are
exhibited.
Substantially Developed
Students were able to identify key
dimensions of good academic writing
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
Presentation and
Communication Not Yet
Presentation is unclear and difficult to
understand; Presenters do not demonstrate
team effort; Presentation falls outside set time
parameters.
Substantially Developed
Presentation is clear and smooth; Presenters
work effectively as a team; Effective use of
time and stays within time parameters.
12

13. Appendix 3: Assessment Criteria for book review
Traits Performance
Concise Not Yet
The book review does not manage to summarize the
contents of the book in a concise manner
Substantially Developed
The book review manages to summarize the
contents of the book in a concise manner
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
13

14. Precise
Not Yet
The review is too imprecise to convince the reader that
the author has done a careful reading
Substantially Developed
The review is precise enough to convince the
reader that the author has done a careful
reading
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
Clear Not Yet
The book review is hard to understand, making it hard
for the author to implement suggestions
Substantially Developed
The book review is clearly written and easy to
follow.
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
14

15. Appendix 4: Assessment Criteria for reflection essay
Traits Performance
Depth of Reflection
Not Yet
Response demonstrates a lack of reflection on, or
personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or
strategies presented in the course materials.
Substantially Developed
Response demonstrates an in-depth
reflection on, and personalization of, the
theories, concepts, and/or strategies
presented in the course materials to date.
Viewpoints and interpretations are
insightful and well supported. Clear,
detailed examples are provided, as
applicable.
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
15

16. Quality of the
writing
Not Yet
Writing is nclear and disorganized. Thoughts ramble and
make little sense. There are numerous spelling,
grammar, or syntax errors throughout the response.
Substantially Developed
Writing is clear, concise, and well organized
with excellent sentence/paragraph
construction. Thoughts are expressed in a
coherent and logical manner. There are no
more than three spelling, grammar, or
syntax errors per page of writing.
Evaluation: Not Yet 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Substantially Developed
Implementation Not Yet
Student relied on a very limited number of strategies to
improve their writing. Strategies that were used have
not significantly improved the original paper.
Substantially Developed
Student has been able to implement a
variety of strategies in making their writing
better. These strategies have significantly
improved the original paper.
16

17. Appendix: Books to review
Available at the NTU library:
1. Inger Mewburn, Katherine Firth, and Shaun Lehmann, How to Fix Your Academic
Writing Trouble: A Practical Guide
2. Paul Silvia, How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing
3. Cal Newport, Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World
4. Patricia Goodson, Becoming an Academic Writer: 50 Exercises for Paced, Productive,
and Powerful Writing
5. Steven Pinker, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st
Century
6. Gillie Bolton & Stephen Rowland, Inspirational Writing for Academic Publication
7. Prose, Francine, Reading like a writer
8. Howard Becker, Writing for Social Scientists: How to Start and Finish Your Thesis,
Book, or Article
9. Joan Bolker, Writing Your Dissertation in Fifteen Minutes a Day
10. John Warner, The Writer’s Practice: Building Confidence in Your Nonfiction Writing
Not available at the library:
1. Joli Jensen, Write No Matter What: Advice for Academics
2. Patricia Goodson, Mina Beigi, and Melika Shirmohammadi, 90 Days, 90 Ways:
Inspiration, Tips & Strategies for Academic Writer
3. Tara Gray, Publish & Flourish: Become a Prolific Scholar
4. Susan Bell, The Artful Edit: On the Practice of Editing Yourself
17