Being visible in your academic or research is essential to your long term career. It also affects how widely your work will be read and disseminated. Search engines like Google will care about who you are and how connected your writing is.
So how do you ensure that you look your best in your online academic profile?
What are you planting today? As you research, write, teach, learn, and market your work, what is your long-term objective for future harvest? Is it a reputation? Position? Legacy?
In this week’s collection of articles from around the web, we explore topics of ethics, the benefit of PhDs, resilience, self-improvement, self-promotion, and mentoring.
Og Mandino once said, “Always do your best. What you plant now, you will harvest later.”
So far this week, we have explored aspects of how trust in peer review is fostered and maintained in academic publishing environments. Specifically, we have examined the responsibility of authors to establish trust through honest manuscript submission and of reviewers to further develop that trust by conducting unbiased and quality reviews.
In this post, we’re going to look at how the publisher is ultimately responsible for demonstrating that established trust to and audience of readers.
In this series of posts exploring how trust in peer review is established, maintained, and delivered, we began yesterday by discussing the author’s role in establishing trust through honest research and reporting practices.
Today, we will explore the responsibilities of the reviewers to further develop that trust through unbiased and quality review practices that lead to an ultimate goal of publishing quality work that is accepted and trusted by the readers.
TAA Vice President, Kevin Patton, is an award-winning professor and textbook author in human anatomy and physiology (A&P). He has a podcast and several blogs about teaching and writing, including TheTextbookAuthor.org. On Thursday, July 9th, as part of the TAA Summer Webinar Series, he will relate his podcasting experience, outline many different benefits of podcasting, and give you loads of practical tips for starting and running your own podcast in his webinar session, “Why Textbook & Academic Authors Should Be Podcasting. Right Now”.
In preparation for this week’s Peer Review Week theme of “Quality in Peer Review”, I decided to reach out to several members of our TAA community for insight into the peer review process from either the author’s perspective, reviewer’s perspective, or both.
Regardless of the perspective, I asked for the answer to a single question, “What makes for a quality peer review process?” The insights of eight TAA members are shared below.
The month of November is Academic Writing Month (AcWriMo). Throughout the month, TAA will be sharing resources and information to support your academic writing efforts. Look for information shared by TAA on social media with #AcWriMo all month long and join the conversation.
Nine candidates are running for five open positions on the TAA Council, the association’s governing board. Three are officer positions, Vice…
Wondering how to get started on Twitter but not sure where to start? Follow these simple instructions to set up…
Q: “A publisher has expressed interest in my ideas for a book, and has asked for a proposal. What goes into a good proposal?”
A: Michael Lennie, Authoring Attorney and Literary Agent, Lennie Literary and Authors’ Attorneys:
“A proposal should be as good as or better than the book itself because publishers sign non-fiction books based on the proposal and one or two sample chapters, not based on the completed book itself. Do not short change yourself by slapping together a generalized proposal. Read the book(s) and relevant articles, and do your best work!”
