This presentation was given at Birmingham Law School's 2014 PhD conference. I spoke about publishing during a PhD - some do's and don't's from my own career.
To make a personality quiz, give it a catchy name related to what type of personality it reveals, create 2-4 personality types to categorize users, write up to 15 short questions to sort users, and share the quiz on social media and your own website/blog to allow others to take it.
This document discusses 5 pieces of dreadful student advice that should be avoided:
1. Dismissing the importance of the first year and not putting in effort, as grades do count in later years and good performance helps with preparation.
2. Signing up for every extracurricular without limit, as it is better to commit fully to a few activities for better experiences and resume quality over many shallow commitments.
3. Only focusing on getting top grades without other experiences, as excellent extracurricular achievements can make up for a small grade difference and success is not guaranteed by grades alone.
4. Blindly following very specific advice like "never do this" or "always do that", as diversity
Julianne Nyhan How to Session at InterFace 2011interface2011
The document provides guidance for postgraduate students on publishing book reviews. It outlines some benefits of writing reviews, such as getting your name and expertise recognized by editors and publishers. It also notes some drawbacks, like not publishing more than 2 reviews per year. The document then offers tips on identifying appropriate journals, contacting editors, meeting deadlines, and iterating with editors. It concludes by describing the hallmarks of a good review, including contextualizing the book within the field, discussing it within a wider intellectual context, and providing fair and balanced criticisms or praise.
To become an academic champion, one must choose the right path by always making good decisions, working hard and smart with others, and never quitting even when challenges arise. Success requires staying focused on schoolwork without wasting time, and avoiding losing focus, wasting time, working alone, and quitting. Striving to be an academic champion will lead to success and help one advance further in life.
Open Access in the Humanities and Social SciencesSAGE Publishing
This document discusses SAGE's open access journal SAGE Open and its experience with open access publishing in the humanities and social sciences. It notes that SAGE Open has received over 2,900 submissions from 104 countries since launching in 2011. It publishes around 500 articles per year and has had over 730,000 article downloads. The document also analyzes submission rates, acceptance rates, reviewer and editor participation rates, and citation data for SAGE Open. It concludes by discussing lessons learned about open access publishing in the humanities and social sciences.
The document discusses how social media profiles can serve as archives that facilitate ordering and telling narratives of identity work and development over time. It notes that Facebook's timeline feature enables reflection on this identity work. Critical life moments like a family death can be visible amid more mundane posts and influence a user's transition away from one platform to another where more friends and family are located. The document also raises implications for using social media data longitudinally in research and ethics of connecting with participants on these sites.
To make a personality quiz, give it a catchy name related to what type of personality it reveals, create 2-4 personality types to categorize users, write up to 15 short questions to sort users, and share the quiz on social media and your own website/blog to allow others to take it.
This document discusses 5 pieces of dreadful student advice that should be avoided:
1. Dismissing the importance of the first year and not putting in effort, as grades do count in later years and good performance helps with preparation.
2. Signing up for every extracurricular without limit, as it is better to commit fully to a few activities for better experiences and resume quality over many shallow commitments.
3. Only focusing on getting top grades without other experiences, as excellent extracurricular achievements can make up for a small grade difference and success is not guaranteed by grades alone.
4. Blindly following very specific advice like "never do this" or "always do that", as diversity
Julianne Nyhan How to Session at InterFace 2011interface2011
The document provides guidance for postgraduate students on publishing book reviews. It outlines some benefits of writing reviews, such as getting your name and expertise recognized by editors and publishers. It also notes some drawbacks, like not publishing more than 2 reviews per year. The document then offers tips on identifying appropriate journals, contacting editors, meeting deadlines, and iterating with editors. It concludes by describing the hallmarks of a good review, including contextualizing the book within the field, discussing it within a wider intellectual context, and providing fair and balanced criticisms or praise.
To become an academic champion, one must choose the right path by always making good decisions, working hard and smart with others, and never quitting even when challenges arise. Success requires staying focused on schoolwork without wasting time, and avoiding losing focus, wasting time, working alone, and quitting. Striving to be an academic champion will lead to success and help one advance further in life.
Open Access in the Humanities and Social SciencesSAGE Publishing
This document discusses SAGE's open access journal SAGE Open and its experience with open access publishing in the humanities and social sciences. It notes that SAGE Open has received over 2,900 submissions from 104 countries since launching in 2011. It publishes around 500 articles per year and has had over 730,000 article downloads. The document also analyzes submission rates, acceptance rates, reviewer and editor participation rates, and citation data for SAGE Open. It concludes by discussing lessons learned about open access publishing in the humanities and social sciences.
The document discusses how social media profiles can serve as archives that facilitate ordering and telling narratives of identity work and development over time. It notes that Facebook's timeline feature enables reflection on this identity work. Critical life moments like a family death can be visible amid more mundane posts and influence a user's transition away from one platform to another where more friends and family are located. The document also raises implications for using social media data longitudinally in research and ethics of connecting with participants on these sites.
A Guide to Getting Published with Mark Moreau, EmeraldLivUniLibrary
The document provides information from a presentation given by Mark Moreau of Emerald Group Publishing on getting published. It discusses Emerald's history and global presence, the objectives of getting published and demystifying the process. It offers tips on choosing the right journal, the editorial decision process, responding to rejections, copyright issues, and promoting one's work. Metrics for measuring impact like the impact factor, H-index, and altmetrics are also covered.
General tips to students at the Biomedical Data Science Mentoring Workshop at the Symposium of Health Informatics in Latin America and the Caribbean (SHILAC) 2015.
1. Getting published in top journals is highly competitive, with acceptance rates below 10%.
2. The review process involves submitting papers to editors who may reject immediately or send to referees for evaluation and a recommendation, followed by opportunities for revision and resubmission.
3. Authors must write papers with novel, well-defined research questions and convincing analysis to compete against other pressures on editors' and referees' time, and should aim to clearly address any comments or recommended revisions if given a chance to resubmit.
The document provides an overview of publishing opportunities and strategies for academics. It discusses the myths around publishing, the value of publishing, and the main types of publishing venues. It covers the peer review process, what editors look for in submissions, and techniques for successful publishing, such as following journal guidelines, incorporating current literature, and addressing a gap in existing research. The document also offers advice on dealing with rejection, collaborating with others, and leveraging everyday opportunities to publish.
The document provides an overview of the paper reviewing process for conferences and journals. It discusses the purpose of reviewing from the perspective of editors and authors. It also outlines what makes a good reviewer and provides tips for writing useful reviews and getting accepted as a reviewer for publications. The key points covered are maintaining the credibility of the publication, protecting the presenter, objectively evaluating the work, and providing constructive feedback to improve the paper.
How to write with purpose to get published in the security field. Includes best practices on how to get started, what to write about, and where to get published.
Taylor & francis how to get published raboudi amina
This document provides tips and guidance for publishing academic articles in journals. It discusses choosing the right journal by understanding the audience and aims of different publications. Key steps in the publishing process are outlined, including developing the idea, writing drafts, and working with a critical friend. Peer review and handling reviewer feedback are explained. Ethics in publishing and common reasons for article rejection are also addressed. The overall message is that authors should carefully select the most appropriate journal, follow submission guidelines, and be responsive to the peer review process.
This document provides guidance for authors on the scholarly publishing process. It covers topics such as choosing the right journal, writing and formatting manuscripts, the peer review process, reasons for rejection, and promoting published work. It also discusses citation metrics, open access publishing, and available author resources from the publisher Taylor & Francis.
This document outlines a seven step plan for co-authoring academic papers with colleagues. It discusses identifying co-authors, discussing the project scope and authorship, targeting journals, writing and revising drafts, and continuing to collaborate throughout the writing process. Challenges like author commitment issues and manuscript rejections are also addressed. The goal is to provide guidance for effective collaboration that results in a successfully published academic paper.
This document provides tips for researchers to effectively publish and communicate their scientific research. It advises researchers to clearly identify the added value and importance of their research. Researchers should also carefully select a journal that is interested in their research and will reach the appropriate audience. When submitting to a journal, authors must follow all of the journal's instructions and guidelines to make the review process smoother. Overall, researchers need to ensure their paper clearly conveys what question they sought to answer, how they conducted their research, and what was learned from their findings and why it is important. Paying close attention to writing an effective abstract and introduction is vital to avoid early rejection.
This document provides guidance on how to read, present, and review research papers. It discusses strategies for effectively reading papers, such as starting with the abstract, introduction, conclusions, and references before skimming the full text. When presenting a research paper, the document recommends structuring the talk around the paper's contribution, technical background, main ideas, related work, and conclusions. It also provides tips for reviewing papers, such as focusing reviews on whether the work advances the field and is understandable. The goal of reviewing is both quality control and providing constructive feedback to improve future work. Overall, the document offers best practices for critically engaging with research papers at different stages.
This document provides guidance on how to read, present, and review research papers. It discusses strategies for effectively reading papers, such as starting with the abstract, introduction, conclusions, and references before fully reading the paper. For presentations, it recommends structuring talks around the paper's contribution, background, main ideas, related work, and future work. It also offers tips for reviewing papers, such as focusing reviews on a paper's quality, contributions, understandability, and potential improvements. The document aims to help readers gain the most from papers and help authors improve their work through constructive peer reviews.
The lecture discusses the peer review process and its type, paper rejection type, Common errors that lead to rejection, Desk Rejection (Rejection without Peer Review), How to write, and read, a PAPER rejection letter, The most common options for next steps after rejection, Tips for responding to reviewer comments on your manuscript, How to answer reviewers for a journal paper revision?. 7th tips for deciding what to change. How to write a great rebuttal/response letter, Letter to Editor, and Letter to reviewers, finally the presenter will show some case studies.
Workshop -- How to successfully write a scientific paper?KnihovnaUTB
Přednášející: Katarzyna Gaca-Zając, PhD Eng. | Elsevier
***********
Během školení se jeho účastníci naučí úspěšně napsat kvalitní vědecký článek, který bude korespondovat s vědeckou komunitou a umožní jeho autorům získat uznání. Představeny budou osvědčené postupy, které jsou založeny na zkušenostech výzkumných pracovníků, redaktorů a čtenářů. Školení je určeno především začínajícím výzkumným pracovníkům, vítáni jsou ale všichni vědečtí pracovníci a akademici.
**********
During this training the attendees will learn how to successfully write a good quality research paper, which will resonate well with the scientific community and will allow them to gain recognition. A summary of the best practices in writing will be presented and these are based on experience of researchers, editors and readers. The training is addressed primarily to young researchers, although senior academics are also welcome to attend.
This is the transcript from the Author Workshop on 23rd June 2009 for Hashim Hashim. It details how to choose the right subject for a paper and explains the whole editorial process.
The document provides information on the writing process for research. It discusses 5 basic steps for structuring writing: prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. Prewriting involves planning like brainstorming and outlining. Drafting is creating a rough draft without worrying about minor errors. Revising is revisiting the draft to modify and improve the content. Editing fixes grammar, spelling, and style errors. Publishing is the final step of sharing the written work. The document also discusses different types of academic writing and strategies for improving academic writing skills.
How to: Recommendation Letters for Grad School Abroad (and beyond...) Jacob Bacon
One of the main mistakes international applicants make in their application process to universities abroad, involves getting the wrong letters of recommendation (or ‘references’) from the wrong people, or managing the recommendation process poorly. Use the cumulative experience of the GradTrain team and follow these rules to choose the right references and learn how to manage the process in order to avoid some common mistakes that can become the “kiss of death” for your application.
Get references who know you well; Choose references who can make you stand out; Choose wisely: Academic vs. professional letters; Be relevant; Don’t be shy; Read the signs; Allow your references enough time and make their lives easier; Fit the narrative of your application; Be appreciative; Don’t ever use a reference without their permission.
Webinar on Dealing With Rejection and Publication Etiquette by Professor Abou...Aboul Ella Hassanien
This document discusses dealing with rejection of scientific papers and publication etiquette. It provides advice on how to respond productively to a rejected paper, including taking time to carefully review rejection feedback, revising the paper to address the issues raised, and potentially resubmitting to the same journal or another journal. The document emphasizes maintaining a professional demeanor and using rejection as an opportunity to improve one's work.
A Guide to Getting Published with Mark Moreau, EmeraldLivUniLibrary
The document provides information from a presentation given by Mark Moreau of Emerald Group Publishing on getting published. It discusses Emerald's history and global presence, the objectives of getting published and demystifying the process. It offers tips on choosing the right journal, the editorial decision process, responding to rejections, copyright issues, and promoting one's work. Metrics for measuring impact like the impact factor, H-index, and altmetrics are also covered.
General tips to students at the Biomedical Data Science Mentoring Workshop at the Symposium of Health Informatics in Latin America and the Caribbean (SHILAC) 2015.
1. Getting published in top journals is highly competitive, with acceptance rates below 10%.
2. The review process involves submitting papers to editors who may reject immediately or send to referees for evaluation and a recommendation, followed by opportunities for revision and resubmission.
3. Authors must write papers with novel, well-defined research questions and convincing analysis to compete against other pressures on editors' and referees' time, and should aim to clearly address any comments or recommended revisions if given a chance to resubmit.
The document provides an overview of publishing opportunities and strategies for academics. It discusses the myths around publishing, the value of publishing, and the main types of publishing venues. It covers the peer review process, what editors look for in submissions, and techniques for successful publishing, such as following journal guidelines, incorporating current literature, and addressing a gap in existing research. The document also offers advice on dealing with rejection, collaborating with others, and leveraging everyday opportunities to publish.
The document provides an overview of the paper reviewing process for conferences and journals. It discusses the purpose of reviewing from the perspective of editors and authors. It also outlines what makes a good reviewer and provides tips for writing useful reviews and getting accepted as a reviewer for publications. The key points covered are maintaining the credibility of the publication, protecting the presenter, objectively evaluating the work, and providing constructive feedback to improve the paper.
How to write with purpose to get published in the security field. Includes best practices on how to get started, what to write about, and where to get published.
Taylor & francis how to get published raboudi amina
This document provides tips and guidance for publishing academic articles in journals. It discusses choosing the right journal by understanding the audience and aims of different publications. Key steps in the publishing process are outlined, including developing the idea, writing drafts, and working with a critical friend. Peer review and handling reviewer feedback are explained. Ethics in publishing and common reasons for article rejection are also addressed. The overall message is that authors should carefully select the most appropriate journal, follow submission guidelines, and be responsive to the peer review process.
This document provides guidance for authors on the scholarly publishing process. It covers topics such as choosing the right journal, writing and formatting manuscripts, the peer review process, reasons for rejection, and promoting published work. It also discusses citation metrics, open access publishing, and available author resources from the publisher Taylor & Francis.
This document outlines a seven step plan for co-authoring academic papers with colleagues. It discusses identifying co-authors, discussing the project scope and authorship, targeting journals, writing and revising drafts, and continuing to collaborate throughout the writing process. Challenges like author commitment issues and manuscript rejections are also addressed. The goal is to provide guidance for effective collaboration that results in a successfully published academic paper.
This document provides tips for researchers to effectively publish and communicate their scientific research. It advises researchers to clearly identify the added value and importance of their research. Researchers should also carefully select a journal that is interested in their research and will reach the appropriate audience. When submitting to a journal, authors must follow all of the journal's instructions and guidelines to make the review process smoother. Overall, researchers need to ensure their paper clearly conveys what question they sought to answer, how they conducted their research, and what was learned from their findings and why it is important. Paying close attention to writing an effective abstract and introduction is vital to avoid early rejection.
This document provides guidance on how to read, present, and review research papers. It discusses strategies for effectively reading papers, such as starting with the abstract, introduction, conclusions, and references before skimming the full text. When presenting a research paper, the document recommends structuring the talk around the paper's contribution, technical background, main ideas, related work, and conclusions. It also provides tips for reviewing papers, such as focusing reviews on whether the work advances the field and is understandable. The goal of reviewing is both quality control and providing constructive feedback to improve future work. Overall, the document offers best practices for critically engaging with research papers at different stages.
This document provides guidance on how to read, present, and review research papers. It discusses strategies for effectively reading papers, such as starting with the abstract, introduction, conclusions, and references before fully reading the paper. For presentations, it recommends structuring talks around the paper's contribution, background, main ideas, related work, and future work. It also offers tips for reviewing papers, such as focusing reviews on a paper's quality, contributions, understandability, and potential improvements. The document aims to help readers gain the most from papers and help authors improve their work through constructive peer reviews.
The lecture discusses the peer review process and its type, paper rejection type, Common errors that lead to rejection, Desk Rejection (Rejection without Peer Review), How to write, and read, a PAPER rejection letter, The most common options for next steps after rejection, Tips for responding to reviewer comments on your manuscript, How to answer reviewers for a journal paper revision?. 7th tips for deciding what to change. How to write a great rebuttal/response letter, Letter to Editor, and Letter to reviewers, finally the presenter will show some case studies.
Workshop -- How to successfully write a scientific paper?KnihovnaUTB
Přednášející: Katarzyna Gaca-Zając, PhD Eng. | Elsevier
***********
Během školení se jeho účastníci naučí úspěšně napsat kvalitní vědecký článek, který bude korespondovat s vědeckou komunitou a umožní jeho autorům získat uznání. Představeny budou osvědčené postupy, které jsou založeny na zkušenostech výzkumných pracovníků, redaktorů a čtenářů. Školení je určeno především začínajícím výzkumným pracovníkům, vítáni jsou ale všichni vědečtí pracovníci a akademici.
**********
During this training the attendees will learn how to successfully write a good quality research paper, which will resonate well with the scientific community and will allow them to gain recognition. A summary of the best practices in writing will be presented and these are based on experience of researchers, editors and readers. The training is addressed primarily to young researchers, although senior academics are also welcome to attend.
This is the transcript from the Author Workshop on 23rd June 2009 for Hashim Hashim. It details how to choose the right subject for a paper and explains the whole editorial process.
The document provides information on the writing process for research. It discusses 5 basic steps for structuring writing: prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. Prewriting involves planning like brainstorming and outlining. Drafting is creating a rough draft without worrying about minor errors. Revising is revisiting the draft to modify and improve the content. Editing fixes grammar, spelling, and style errors. Publishing is the final step of sharing the written work. The document also discusses different types of academic writing and strategies for improving academic writing skills.
How to: Recommendation Letters for Grad School Abroad (and beyond...) Jacob Bacon
One of the main mistakes international applicants make in their application process to universities abroad, involves getting the wrong letters of recommendation (or ‘references’) from the wrong people, or managing the recommendation process poorly. Use the cumulative experience of the GradTrain team and follow these rules to choose the right references and learn how to manage the process in order to avoid some common mistakes that can become the “kiss of death” for your application.
Get references who know you well; Choose references who can make you stand out; Choose wisely: Academic vs. professional letters; Be relevant; Don’t be shy; Read the signs; Allow your references enough time and make their lives easier; Fit the narrative of your application; Be appreciative; Don’t ever use a reference without their permission.
Webinar on Dealing With Rejection and Publication Etiquette by Professor Abou...Aboul Ella Hassanien
This document discusses dealing with rejection of scientific papers and publication etiquette. It provides advice on how to respond productively to a rejected paper, including taking time to carefully review rejection feedback, revising the paper to address the issues raised, and potentially resubmitting to the same journal or another journal. The document emphasizes maintaining a professional demeanor and using rejection as an opportunity to improve one's work.
Similar to Publishing bls phd conference 2014 sv slides (20)
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
This document briefly explains the June compliance calendar 2024 with income tax returns, PF, ESI, and important due dates, forms to be filled out, periods, and who should file them?.
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...lawyersonia
The legal profession, which has historically been male-dominated, has experienced a significant increase in the number of women entering the field over the past few decades. Despite this progress, women lawyers continue to encounter various challenges as they strive for top positions.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
8. Tips:
1. Find someone to
write with
2. Do something simple to
start off
3. Factor in ‘drawer’ time
4. Get feedback from as
many people as possible
9. Journal Processes
1. You send it in
2. Normally, the editor reads it
3. It goes out for review
4. Reviewers send in comments
5. Acceptance/Rejection/Resubmission
6. Copyright Form + Proofs
7. Publication
10. Feedback + Rejection
“It may be that you are just not capable of
the sort of scholarship we are looking for…”
11. Publishing your PhD as a Book
1. Do your publisher
research
2. Don’t send your
proposal off ‘cold’
3. Don’t send off your entire
thesis, unless asked
4. Be prepared for a bit
of a fight