Follow me on Twitter
My Tweetspatter on facebook
-
Recent Posts
- patter’s diary
- should you highlight the paper you’re reading?
- propositional density – a helpful steer on writing and revising
- using the progressive disclosure principle in academic writing
- anonymisation – what’s in a name?
- everyday annotation
- my supervisor expects me to keep revising – why?
- why journal articles get rejected – #3
- finding debates and discussions in the literature
- why journal articles are rejected #2
- why journal articles get rejected #1
- what’s a post PhD research plan, or research agenda?
Copyright
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
SEE MY CURATED POSTS ON WAKELET
LOOKING 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- abstracts academic blogging academic book academic writing argument authority in writing blogging blogging about blogging books book writing chapter co-writing conclusion conference conference papers conference presentation contribution data data analysis doctoral research early career researchers editing examiner feedback introduction journal journal article literature mapping literature review literature reviews literature themes methods chapter peer review PhD publishing reader reading research research methods revision revision strategy starting the PhD supervision Tate Summer School theory thesis time Uncategorized voice writing
Top Posts & Pages
- aims and objectives - what's the difference?
- should you highlight the paper you’re reading?
- writing a bio-note
- concluding the journal article
- avoiding the laundry list literature review
- connecting chapters/chapter introductions
- thesis knowhow – “the contribution” can create coherence
- patter's diary
- recycling your thesis text - is it self plagiarism?
- connecting chapters/chapter conclusions
Meta
Tag Archives: reviewing
the lazy reviewer costs us all
This is a guest post from Dr Julie Rowlands. Julie’s research applies a critical sociology of education perspective to academic governance, higher education systems, academic work and organisational change. The book of her PhD is on its way – Academic Governance in Contemporary Universities: … Continue reading
the appraisal and rejection of conference abstracts
I had an email recently from an early career researcher who’d just had an abstract for a conference knocked back. When they asked for feedback, they were shocked by what they read. Presumably assuming that the writer would never see … Continue reading
Posted in abstracts, conference papers, early career researchers, peer review, rejection, reviewing
Tagged conference abstract, Pat Thomson, rejection, reviewing
8 Comments
writing course day four
Today in the writing course we began with a shut-up-and-write about what needed to go in the methods section. • What does the journal’s community expect in this section? • What do readers need to know to trust what you … Continue reading
Posted in academic writing, conclusion, middle work, reviewing
Tagged ending work, middle work, Pat Thomson, reviewing, writing course
1 Comment
patter 