Most useful textbook and academic posts of the week: December 24, 2020
As we near the end of 2020, a year filled with disruption, change, and challenges resulting from the pandemic, inspiration can be hard to come by. It’s in these times that we must rely on our identified goals, routine practices, and positive experiences to move forward and stay the course. Peter De Vries summarized his writing habit as follows, “I only write when I’m inspired, so I see to it that I’m inspired every morning at nine o’clock.”
Whether a daily routine or simply a mindset of perseverance in weathering the storms that have been and are sure to come in the future, success will be found in finding your own writing inspiration. As we see in this week’s collection of articles, we’re all facing challenges together – some new and some old – but the only way forward is through.
This week, reflect on what you have been able to sustain throughout 2020, what you want to achieve in the new year ahead, and which voices in your circle (or your own head) are ones that you should listen to in an effort to move forward with your writing efforts. Then move forward and we’ll get through this period of disruption, change, and challenges – together. Happy writing!
As COVID-19 spread around the earth in the early months of 2020, digital disruption followed close behind. The results for publishing are decidedly mixed. In this second episode of a three-part review for 2020, we learn how publishers are navigating through storms of change.
How do we choose what to research? Do we choose, or do our topics choose us? I’ve been musing about this, as I’ve recently had to explain why I chose to spend six years collating information about the scandalous and sometimes downright corrupt practices in English schools. Why a focus on corruption? My answer may seem a little “unacademic’…
It’s been noted that whilst publishers have experienced a surge in submissions to STM journals since the start of the pandemic, other subject areas have contracted – particularly in the arts and humanities. At De Gruyter, we too have seen a recent sharp rise in submissions to our medical titles. Good news indeed, but as a scholarly publisher supporting authors across multiple fields – not just the sciences – and with a particularly strong focus on humanities book publishing, we need to pause for thought. Behind every journal submission is an individual researcher or team of researchers. We need to recognize that whilst some people and some teams have been thriving, others have experienced limitations and challenges in their work. We have been seeking to capture and better understand these limiting factors.
Did you know that there are a boatload of myths that spiral around what social media is; how to use it; what you should be doing; and why you should be doing it? Myths that the pros and experts don’t open doors to explore.
Linking theory with research, choosing a theoretical framework and developing alternative explanations
I taught Research Design this past fall and one of the key challenges I see in teaching how to properly design research projects is the chasm that exists between theory development and empirical testing. For some reason, it is hard for some students (and more than one scholar!) to link theory with research. This discussion is one I have had for a very long while with my colleagues, Dr. Rodrigo Salazar Elena and Dr. Gloria del Castillo Aleman.
We’re often taught that the best critique group feedback is reactions to the writing, rather than advice for fixing it. But prescriptive feedback—critiques that include suggestions for you how to might rewrite something—is an important part of the process. In this episode we discuss how we curate our critique groups and filter their feedback to improve our writing, and our experiences with these groups.