SEE MY CURATED POSTS ON WAKELETLOOKING FOR POSTS ON WRITING FOR JOURNALS? REVISING AND EDITING? GIVING FEEDBACK AND REVIEWING? READING? GIVING A CONFERENCE PAPER? VISIT MY WAKES ON https://wakelet.com/@patter
Follow me on TwitterMy Tweets
CopyrightPatter by Pat Thomson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at Patricia.Thomson@nottingham.ac.uk.
- abstracts academic blogging academic book academic writing argument authority in writing blogging books book writing chapter co-writing conclusion conference conference papers conference presentation contribution crafting writing data doctoral education doctoral research early career researchers editing ethics examiner feedback introduction journal journal article literature mapping literature review methods chapter peer review PhD public engagement publishing reader reading research research methods research project revision revision strategy supervision Tate Summer School theory thesis time Uncategorized voice writing
- PhD by publication
- the joys of creative re-description
- a thesis (often) needs A Big Idea
- writing targets – word count, time spent, or chunks?
- don’t give your thesis examiner a bad first impression
- safety and research
- what is “measured” writing?
- make a poster then write your paper
- broadcasting your research
- book writing – an occasional post
- proofreading tactics
- going to a huge conference
Top Posts & Pages
- PhD by publication
- aims and objectives - what's the difference?
- theory makes us feel stupid
- writing the thesis – the theoretical framework
- eight ways to write theory very badly
- what's a framework? - as in, conceptual or theoretical framework
- writing a bio-note
- writing the introduction to a journal article
- theory fright - part one
- leave a good last impression - the thesis conclusion
Category Archives: refereeing
This is a story told against myself. It’s about doing something that I really, really shouldn’t have done. Before I go on I will just say that the story is actually pretty trivial in the overall state of the world, … Continue reading
So you’ve sent the paper into the journal and now the referee comments are in your in-box. You finally pluck up the courage to open the email and what do you find? Contradictory comments. Not helpful. Not at all. We … Continue reading
I’ve written about rejections several times, and most of this is scattered throughout the blog, so I thought it might be helpful to amalgamate the most important points together. All in one place. There are some very common reasons why … Continue reading
Having read the article carefully, and decided whether it’s accept without change, revise and resubmit or reject, there is now the task of writing the feedback to the author/s. There are four things to keep in mind when writing feedback: … Continue reading
Journals always ask reviewers to recommend whether an article should be published as is, or whether the writer should do small or large revisions. They also ask if the article should be rejected outright. Making a publication recommendation can feel … Continue reading