Search results

This paper seeks to urge academic writers to restructure their scholarly writing to reflect the depth of their intellectual message rather than conforming to the structurally simplistic hegemony of the mundane.

The authors of this paper represent interdisciplinary perspectives in research. Each has grown increasingly disillusioned by dwindling consideration given to the structural integrity of scholarly thoughts in academic writing. This paper does not suggest a solution of strict adherence to some style manual or single format, nor does it suggest a privilege to any particular constraint. Indeed, the authors suggest that the digital environment enables unimagined communication possibilities, and hence a counterpoise to any single rigid structure. New formats require attention to the engineering of message structure. Using historical examples and modern applications from their disciplines, the authors offer provocations on the structures of scholarly writing. They pay particular attention to modern applications of Claude Shannon's information theory and to the introduction of models for understanding the audiences of academic writing.

Scholarly writing warrants a deep investment of intellectual, personal, and communicative effort. Readers will have different requirements for any individual piece of scholarly writing, but all will be served by the fullest expression of the logic, care, tenacity, and passion that drove the research to fruition. Engineering the scholarly document to contribute to audiences of differing interests and abilities requires careful consideration rather than mere assumption of a generic reader.

Research for this paper yielded few preceding studies that considered document structures for scholarship. Authors of this paper intend to provoke academes to engage in active and intentional reconsiderations of how they choose to say what they have to say, by following the presented examples of writing and tools for measuring structural elements of documents.

The purpose of this study is to have a closer look at the awareness of referencing utilities among the library professionals in India. In a research environment, referencing and bibliography play an important role in the dissemination of research findings through scholarly writings. Citing references while writing scholarly articles has become more eloquent mainly due to the availability of a range of bibliography management utilities. Currently, there are various types of Bibliography Management Software (BMS) available for the management of the citation, referencing and compiling bibliographies. Librarians have a crucial role to play in helping the faculty, students and research scholars in the process of writing their scholarly articles and theses, especially in the area of referencing.

The study was conducted through an online survey with an aim to assess the perception, awareness and use of BMS by the Library and Information Science (LIS) professionals in India.

In the academic environment, published results of research findings are crucial for the advancement of knowledge. The published research findings are often supported and disputed using the citation of previous studies. There are a number of supporting technologies that are intended to help in procuring needed citations and streamlining them for better research output. The role of the librarian in this endeavor is undisputed. This study shows that there is a need for strengthening the awareness of BMS at the institutional level and also hands-on experience is needed for library professionals to help in the process of research writing and advocate for adopting correct referencing style (citation style) while writing scholarly articles.

The increased use of information and communication technology in the process of scholarly writing, especially in the search and retrieval of relevant articles and the availability of electronic journals and books, have resulted in an increased number of research articles being written by research scholars. The downside to this overflow of scholarly and creative writing is the incorrect way of using referencing style in the dissemination of research and the possibilities of malpractice and plagiarism. This study will help in creating awareness of the utility of citation and BMS in content writing, especially among library and information professionals, as they play an important role in facilitating research.

This study will be beneficial for the LIS professionals in understanding the effectiveness of their services when complemented by the use of technology-powered tools. Creating awareness of the use of BMS in content development in scholarly communication promises to create a flawless scholarly output as library professionals will help researchers in guiding research writings with correct referencing and citation.

Use of BMS helps in the development of content in an organized, methodical and scientific way. The role of library and information professionals working with different researchers and scholars in advocating and practicing the use of BMS will go a long way in creating more streamlined content.

This study aims to investigate basic/core principles and practical tools behind successful manuscript writing for education journals. Drawing on the insights of journal editors and related literature, this paper seeks to clarify the craft of preparing quality manuscripts to meet the expectations of academic journals.

This paper uses an interpretivist framework by incorporating a qualitative analysis of the literature with the authors’ experiences to identify key principles and issues in academic publishing. These narratives provide an empirical basis for understanding the mechanics and essence of effective manuscript crafting. The study integrates theoretical knowledge with actionable strategies, focusing on identifying the objectives and processes of writing, determining common challenges and directing readers toward comprehensive resources for guidance in article writing.

This study reveals that manuscript rejections often transcend technical shortcomings. Issues that are central to nonacceptance include misalignment with a journal’s thematic focus, absence of a coherent and persuasive argument, methodological weaknesses and insufficient evidence underpinning the assertions. Successful publication depends not just on data presentation and adherence to submission norms but also on developing a narrative that enriches the prevailing scholarly discourse. Our findings advocate for manuscripts that strike an appropriate balance between lucidity and analytical rigor, avoid superfluous technical language and express a mix of assertiveness and scholarly modesty.

Although there is literature on academic writing, very few recent articles have been uncovered that probe the intricacies of crafting education manuscripts and point to resources.

The focus of this paper is to study the influence of social media on scholarly communication. The aim is to provide an overview of researchers' use of Web 2.0 techniques, and discuss a possible change of information behaviors in the context of scholarly communication.

A web survey was distributed to a targeted sample of university staff (professors, teachers, researchers, and doctoral students). SPSS was utilized as a main tool to synthesize and analyze data, and present the results.

Web 2.0 tools are well‐known to researchers. Most researchers are familiar with blogs, wikis, social networks, multimedia sharing, and online document. Social media provide a convenient environment for scholarly communication. Depending on different aims within the scholarly communication process, researchers choose appropriate modes of communication in their research work.

A combination of content analysis with survey and/or interviews may highlight other aspects of Web 2.0, which is not possible using a single method of content analysis.

There are few studies on the changes of scholarly communication in the context of Web 2.0. This study provides new insights for exploring the effects of Web 2.0 tools on scholarly communication and the development of new information behavior to match the scholarly environment of social media. This understanding can aid the researchers to keep abreast of new characteristics of scholarly communication and help the librarians to develop the correlative services in the scholarly environment of social media.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse scholarly subjectivity in the context of citation practices in interdisciplinary PhD research.

The paper provides an analysis of longitudinal series of qualitative interviews with PhD students who write scholarly articles as dissertation components. Conceptualizations of subjectivity within practice theories form the basis for the analysis.

Scholarly argumentation entails a rhetorical paradox of “bringing something new” to the communication while at the same time “establishing a common ground” with an audience. By enacting this paradox through citing in an emerging interdisciplinary setting, the informants negotiate subject positions in different modes of identification across the involved disciplines. In an emerging interdisciplinary field, the articulation of scholarly subjectivity is a joint open-ended achievement demanding knowledgeability in multiple disciplinary understandings and conducts. However, identifications that are expressible within the informants’ local site, i.e. interactions with supervisors, other seniors and peers, are not always expressible when negotiating subject positions with journals.

This paper contributes to research on citation practices in emerging interdisciplinary fields. By linking the enactment of citing in scholarly writing to the negotiation of subject positions, the paper provides new insights about the complexities involved in becoming a scholar.

Many students irrespective of level of study produce excellent course work which, if given support and encouragement, could clearly be of a publishable standard. Academic staff are expected to produce quality publications meeting peer-review standards although they may be relatively novice authors. All are engaged in some aspects of academic writing practices but not as frequently involved in co-production of publications emanating from student work. This activity is still at the margins of much of the student experience. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Mindful of these issues, the authors designed and offered a writing programme including a writing retreat. This brought together undergraduate and postgraduate students from a range of applied disciplines (health and art, design and architecture) and their supervisors with the aim of co-producing publications and participating in a community of scholarly practice. The project was delivered over nine months. It involved four days “compulsory” attendance and included a preparatory workshop, a two day off-campus writing retreat and a dissemination event. Student and supervisors applied to participate as a team. Kirkpatrick’s (2006) four-stage classic model: reaction, learning, changes in behaviour and real world results was used as a framework for the educational evaluation.

Key findings organised thematically were: supervisor-supervisee relationships; space and time; building confidence enabling successful writing and publication.

This paper will provide an overview of the design, content and approaches used for successful delivery of this innovative project. It will draw on examples that illustrate the different types of joint enterprise that emerged, illuminate experiences of co-production and co-authorship along with recommendations for future ventures.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of research evaluation policies and their interpretation on academics’ writing practices in three different higher education institutions and across three different disciplines. Specifically, the paper discusses how England’s national research excellence framework (REF) and institutional responses to it shape the decisions academics make about their writing.

In total, 49 academics at three English universities were interviewed. The academics were from one Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics discipline (mathematics), one humanities discipline (history) and one applied discipline (marketing). Repeated semi-structured interviews focussed on different aspects of academics’ writing practices. Heads of departments and administrative staff were also interviewed. Data were coded using the qualitative data analysis software, ATLAS.ti.

Academics’ ability to succeed in their career was closely tied to their ability to meet quantitative and qualitative targets driven by research evaluation systems, but these were predicated on an unrealistic understanding of knowledge creation. Research evaluation systems limited the epistemic choices available to academics, partly because they pushed academics’ writing towards genres and publication venues that conflicted with disciplinary traditions and partly because they were evenly distributed across institutions and age groups.

This work fills a gap in the literature by offering empirical and qualitative findings on the effects of research evaluation systems in context. It is also one of the only papers to focus on the ways in which individuals’ academic writing practices in particular are shaped by such systems.

Arizona State University (ASU) West is a new, upper division undergraduate and graduate campus serving western Maricopa County and metropolitan Phoenix. The students are typically working adults from the community who come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. Most are drawn from the local community colleges, where they complete their first two years of college before entering ASU West.