Publishing

How does one write a paper when there really isn’t time?

I had a chapter due next week that I thought was due next month. Obviously, when I realized that yesterday, I needed to get it in gear. Let me start by saying that I have finished it, but quickly let you know that it was a chapter for a textbook and was limited to approximately 1750 words. (I actually wrote 2500, which I kept as a separate file, and then shortened the chapter for publication.)

All that to say, I know whereof I speak.

1. Write on something you already know well.
This worked for me because the chapter I had contracted to write on was something I teach regularly and have already published work on. It will work for you if it is a topic that you have studied or enjoy or know a lot about, even if you have to stretch what you know for the paper.

It also means I already have entire file folders (both real and virtual) on the topic that I can access for ideas, details, or examples.

2. Write on the computer.
That’s not an easy thing for many people. I know I prefer paper drafts. But when I am in a hurry, I write on the computer.

Writing on the computer allows me to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. What? You didn’t know English was math? It is. Writing on the computer allows me to add information easily, subtract words or sections, multiply the copies of the text (so that if I decide in three hours I needed that paragraph after all, I still have it), and divide paragraphs or sections if they get too unwieldy.

It also allows me to immediately search the web if I’m not sure, for example, how many major digressions there are in Beowulf. (Which, by the way, was a fruitless search because the digressions aren’t categorized into major and minor by anyone I could find easily.) Plus, if I use Google Scholar, then I can find articles which my library has never even heard of and–if they look useful enough–purchase them immediately. (Note: This can get expensive, obviously, but this is for fast work, not cheap work.)

You have to be careful on searches because you can end up chasing a rabbit through Wonderland without getting anywhere useful. I had 179 different websites I looked at online for this chapter. –I didn’t count them at the time, but went back through my history just now to check.– Some of those are still open because the information was very useful for something else but not so much for my chapter. I added two PDFs to my virtual folders while I was searching as well.

Don’t look at too many things (how many that will be depends on how well you know your subject, how long you have to write, and whether you can stay focused). If you are in a hurry, you can’t spend too much time on a scavenger hunt. I abandoned two ideas I really wanted to write on (animals and religion) because I needed to get the work done.

Working on the computer also allows me to make sure that my spelling is correct and that the words mean what I think they mean. (What? You thought English teachers were always sure of those things? Nope. But my spelling was correct, even when the computer didn’t recognize the words, and the words did mean what I thought they meant… this time.)

3. Write an outline and follow it.
In this I was unusually blessed. The chapter came with an outline I had to follow. The outline didn’t say what to write for each section, I had to figure that out, but it did keep me focused on my topics: theme, character, history, context, etc.

Note: I went back to check another work I wrote, just now, and found that it had misspelled a name with spell check (so I have about 30 misspellings of Posthumus from Cymbeline) and I missed a s-v agreement issue when I changed a sentence. OUCH.

4. Don’t try to do everything.
I had a limited number of words I could write and a limited number of hours to write them in. I skipped major topics that I would have liked to have written individual papers on in the interests of getting the work done.

Does that mean I didn’t do the work well?

No, it doesn’t. It means that I concentrated on the aspects of the topic that I could already write a chapter on (with perhaps some access to my notes and a few fact-checking forays into the net). And I chose to not write about what I knew I couldn’t do quickly or that I would be unhappy with if I shortened.

That is one good thing about writing. If I want to write more later, I can. While I won’t be able to publish it in that chapter, I can use it in my classroom or somewhere else. Knowing that helps me to stay focused on getting the paper done.

Times Higher Education has an intriguing post:

Despite exhortations to academics to collaborate, jointly authored research still draws some suspicion. Co-authors Janet Beer and Avril Horner are adamant that, with the right chemistry, such efforts can repay huge professional and personal benefits.

The article presents a typical news article for higher education, with a narrative/story that draws me (as an educator) in.

I have not done joint research and, unless the opportunity to work on an edited book comes up, I don’t actually have any desire to. (Note: I would not really have thought that working on an edited book would be a great way to do joint authoring until I read this article.)

Despite that, I found the article intriguing, not so much for the idea (common in many fields and I am well aware of that) or the backlash (I would have expected that.), but for the changes throughout the article. It starts as a typical news article and then moves into a section with single-sentence paragraphs on the job of one of the joint authors. Then it presents them writing on each other.

I just think the multi-phasic presentation is interesting.

TCE has multiple Google search top hits. These are mostly students who are trying to figure out how to do an assignment that a teacher has given them. However, sometimes it is other things.

TCE was originally aimed at folks like me who teach at CCs or SLACs and are interested in a variety of information on the topic because their lives are not focused on a single element.

I love the fact that despite this goal, TCE serves hundreds of students every day, thousands every month, teaching them about how to write literary analyses. My handouts for teachers have become handouts the students search out and use.

I would love for TCE to get more attention, despite the fact that it has a significant amount of folks heading here on a regular basis.

I am also interested in expanding my blogs’ reach because TCE is not the only blog I operate. While my personal blog is fine in obscurity (I use it to keep information I want to be able to search.), my classroom blog and my school blog (where I write as a teacher about my experience) could use some readers.

Inside Higher Ed has an article in Career Advice on expanding your blog’s reach.

Getting other blogs to link to you is incredibly important in building a community of readers. From a search engine’s perspective, when other sites link to your blog these links act like citations. Naturally, the blog with hundreds or thousands of other blogs citing it means that this is a site that people enjoy and find valuable. If you are recognized as an authority in your subject, search engines will promote your site.

This is not something I have ever considered doing, but I guess I should.

Also, if you are trying to use your blog to raise awareness about an issue in higher education, a good tactic is to add an insightful comment on articles in major publications. Authors (even national authors) often keep a close eye on comments, especially right after publication. If you add something insightful and direct other readers back to your blog, this will put you on the author’s radar and could result in them using you as an expert in any follow-up articles. (This strategy personally resulted in my own personal blog being cited twice in national media).

And here is something else I have not done which would be very simple to do.

The Internet is a contextual universe, organized by small networks that connect individual sites to larger groups of sites. A key way to extend the reach of your site is to put content on other sites relevant to your chosen topic. In other words, don’t just post your best stuff on your blog. Pass it around the community.

I am just beginning to do this. I sent a post to From Tweet to Thesis. It will be coming out this weekend.

Dr. Lee Skallerup at College Ready Writing is very good about doing these types of things. Perhaps I should just follow her example, footstep by footstep.

I am reading Mike Nappa’s book 77 Reasons Why Your Book Was Rejected (and how to make sure it won’t happen again!) and he said:

If you absolutely can’t write with everyday clarity on a subject, then you’re going to have to go into academia. You’ll need a few advanced degrees and a dedication to reach an isolated audience that’s often out of touch with current thinking. but if this style of writing suits you, then you can succeed in this publishing category, so feel free to pursue that option.

Ouch. Several stings in one short paragraph of “Reason No. 18: Eschew Obfuscation.”

Is it accurate? Possibly. Is it funny? Not to me.

Is it something we need to consider? Yes. A lot.

Contributions are invited for an essay collection on the representations of disability and the disabled body in science fiction. Technology is often characterized as a cure for the disabled body – one that either elides or exacerbates corporeal difference. From block buster films and televised space operas to cyberpunk and hard SF, disabled bodies are often modified and supported by technological interventions. How are dis/ability, medical “breakthroughs,” (bio) technologies, and the body theorized, materialized, and politicized in science fiction? This collection is particularly interested in the ways dis/abled bodies challenge normative discourses of ability, generate novel spaces of embodiment, and proliferate new understandings of human being.

Contributions are welcomed from both academic- and arts-based researchers and practitioners from a wide range of critical perspectives: literary studies, disability studies, feminist studies, science and technology studies, critical theory, race studies, queer studies, media studies, film studies, Aboriginal studies, cultural studies, and rhetoric studies. Papers may deal with the representation of disability in any form of popular genre SF: film, television, and print (including all SF subgenres i.e.: feminist SF, post-cyberpunk, hard SF, steampunk, etc.). All possible topics related to the representation of disability and disabled persons in SF are welcome: dis/ability, illness, technology as cure, prosthetics, diseased bodies/contagion, care of the self, alterations to the body, corporeal boundaries, environmental modifications, medical care, and alternative constructions of being.

Send a 300- to 500-word abstract, working title, and a brief bio, by email in a Word attachment, to kathryn@academiceditingcanada.ca before or on November 18, 2011. Inquiries are also welcome. Final papers should range in length from 5000-8000 words.

About the editor: Kathryn Allan received her PhD in English Literature from McMaster University (2010) studying feminist post-cyberpunk SF and theories of the vulnerable body. She currently is an independent SF scholar, working as a freelance writer and (academic) editor.

Notes:

First thought of McCaffrey’s Ships series. Then Moon’s Serrano series, with Celia as the main disability person. Weber’s Honor Harrington (cybernetic eye and arm). Miller and Lee, the one with the monkey.

This would be something I could do and something that would be interesting to me. I need to get to work on getting more publications out. This would be a good choice.

CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS
Proposal Submission Deadline: October 15, 2011

Online Credibility and Digital Ethos: Evaluating Computer-Mediated Communication
- A book edited by Shawn Apostel and Moe Folk
- To be published by IGI Global: http://bit.ly/oESA7c

Introduction
With the near ubiquity of smartphones, tablets, and laptops, acquiring and publishing online information has never been easier; however, increased access to consuming and producing digital information raises new challenges to establishing and evaluating online credibility. These challenges are important because they affect a broad range of meaning-making, both inside and outside of academia. For example, the events of the Arab Spring show that in the absence of what were traditionally seen as relatively reliable information sources, “unofficial” online sources deemed credible by a wide range of actors played a key role in successful uprisings.

Objective of the Book
Offering chapters written by scholars from across the disciplines and from different countries, this book will provide general approaches to evaluating the credibility of digital sources, specific advice for popular websites, and techniques useful for a wide variety of digital genres.

Target Audience
This book would be useful for a variety of academic disciplines, as students continue to utilize online sources in their research. Information literacy specialists would find useful the chapters which focus on particular types of popular sources like Wikipedia, Facebook, and iReports). Journalists and educators in the field of Mass Communication and Library Sciences would find the book useful in establishing protocols for approaching a wide variety of sources. Web designers and writers could use this book to establish a more credible online presence. However, we feel the target audience would be instructors of introductory level courses which involve research. Graduate students and academics could utilize certain chapters to establish a method for determining the credibility of a source they use for research purposes.

Recommended Topics
Recommended topics include, but are not limited to, the following:

- General approaches to evaluating online credibility (typos/grammar, design/usability, advertisements, urls, links, contact info, search engine listing, use of stock photos, use of phone/address, date of publication, author, expertise, overall strategies, online universities).
- Establishing and evaluating credibility with popular websites:(Ebay, YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Twitter, Second life)
- Establishing and evaluating credibility in a variety of digital genres: (Blogs, travel websites, online journals, restaurant reviews, emails, product reviews, online games, websites, discussion lists, iReports/news, app ratings, freeware ratings, avatars)

We are particularly interested in submissions that situate how to evaluate and incorporate digital ethos and online credibility as part of researched arguments in various disciplines. While we expect many chapters will examine issues related to the displayed content of the sites in question, we also welcome chapters that evaluate the behind the scene effects on content such as research funding, domain holders, etc.

Submission Procedure
Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before October 15, 2011 a 250-500 word chapter proposal clearly explaining the mission and concerns of their proposed chapter. Authors of accepted proposals will be notified by November 15, 2011 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by February 15, 2012. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.

Publisher
This book is scheduled to be published in spring 2013 by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.), publisher of the “Information Science Reference” (formerly Idea Group Reference), “Medical Information Science Reference,” “Business Science Reference,” and “Engineering Science Reference” imprints. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit www.igi-global.com.

Important Dates
October 15, 2011: Proposal Submission Deadline
November 15, 2011: Notification of Acceptance
February 15, 2012: Full Chapter Submission
April 15, 2012: Review Results Returned to Authors
May 15, 2012: Revised Chapter Submission
May 30, 2012: Final Acceptance Notification
June 15, 2012: Submission of Final Chapters

Editorial Advisory Board Members:
- Lisbeth Kitson, Lecturer, School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Australia
- Trenia Napier, Research Coordinator, Eastern Kentucky University, United States
- Miriam J. Metzger, Associate Professor, University of California, Santa Barbara, United States
- Andrew Morrison, Professor of Interdisciplinary Design, Institute of Design, Norway
- James P. Purdy, Assistant Professor of English/Writing Studies, Duquesne University, United States
- Jennifer Roswell, Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair in Multiliteracies, Brock University, Canada
- Malin Utter, University of Borås, Sweden

Inquiries and submissions can be forwarded electronically (.doc, .docx, or rtf) to digital.ethos@gmail.com

Shawn Apostel
Communication Coordinator, Noel Studio for Academic Creativity
Eastern Kentucky University
Library 210Q, 521 Lancaster Avenue
Richmond, KY 40475-3102
shawn.apostel@eku.edu

Moe Folk
Assistant Professor of Digital Rhetoric and Multimodal Composition
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania
238 Lytle Hall
Kutztown, PA 19530
folk@kutztown.edu

Compendium2: Writing, Teaching, and Learning in the University

I am wondering, as some of you may be as well, where the articles which we wrote that were to be published “soon” or “next year” go when they don’t make it through the publication process. I know that sometimes it is an entire publisher’s demise that took down my text, but I know it isn’t always that.

I have written two encyclopedia articles and neither of them have seen the light of day. I know that one will never be published. I received an email from the editor alerting me to the fact that she only received 51 of the 600 promised articles. (Remind me never to be an editor of an encyclopedia!)

I looked up the other article and, while I can find multiple CVs which reference the five-volume work, some listed as 2009, 2011, April 2011, and forthcoming, I cannot find the books on the publisher’s website. So I don’t think they do actually exist. Unfortunately I also don’t know if they ever will exist.

The article was due 8/1/10. I got it in on time, despite the fact that I spent the first three weeks of July teaching school and spending most of the rest of my time with my dying mother. She died 7/19.

I guess I don’t have any sympathy for folks who don’t turn in their work when I get mine done on time even under those circumstances.

Since the due date was last August, I would not expect the work to have come out yet. In fact, I could easily see an August 2012 publication deadline, so perhaps that particular article is not “dead dead” (as they say in EMS).

Lines and Colors feeds my need for beauty in art regularly. http://www.linesandcolors.com/2011/09/07/into-the-pixel/>This post added a possibility of helping my students who are artists prepare for the undergraduate research festival with the kind of work featured.

Into the Pixel is a yearly juried art exhibit showcasing concept and visual development art from the gaming industry.

Sponsored by the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences and the Entertainment Software Association, the exhibition is displayed at the E3 Expo.

You can also view the selections from this year, as well as the past several years, in the online galleries.