i was completely unprepared to do academic writing of any kind.
i was MONTHS into my PhD before anyone even asked me what i was thinking of doing in terms of publishing. no one ever told me about how to scout journals, what to expect in a peer review, or how to decide what kinds of things to publish when.
i wish that i had Dr. Jo VanEvery’s short guides then. i’m so grateful you can have them now.
i first learned of Dr. VanEvery’s work when we crossed paths in a community for self-employed PhDs. she runs an amazing, generative salon of sorts for writers. like me, her work takes different forms, from coaching to community writing spaces, and her short guides are an outgrowth of that important work.
the four short guides are, well, short - but in a good way; you don’t have to take all day to read one and get something useful out of it. they’re practical and full of time-tested strategies and information to help demystify some of the most confusing and insider-only areas of academia. I can’t describe the topics any more elegantly than the author herself:
The Scholarly Writing Process
Scholarly writing involves both using writing to articulate your own ideas and get clarity on what contributions you could make, and writing things that will communicate those contributions to other scholars (and perhaps those beyond academe). Getting stuck is a normal part of the writing process, even for experienced writers. My aim in publishing this Short Guide is to help you generate new writing projects, keep your writing projects moving forward, and ensure that your writing process results in publications. Designed so you can refer to it whenever you get stuck, this Short Guide breaks down the scholarly writing process into stages and provides both a description of that stage and writing prompts to help you get unstuck.
Finding Time for Scholarly Writing
Finding Time for your Scholarly Writing addresses the problem of juggling writing alongside your other responsibilities. I identify three kinds of time: full days, longish sessions, and short snatches. In this Short Guide, I explain what kinds of writing you can do in each, and suggest ways of combining the three to ensure that you make the best use of the time available at different points in the academic year.
Scholarly Publishing
In Scholarly Publishing, I focus on the big picture of publishing for scholarly audiences. After discussing the purpose of publishing for scholarly readers and what is meant by making a contribution to the advancement of knowledge, I look in detail at the main types of scholarly publication: books, peer reviewed journal articles, and various types of work-in-progress publishing (conference papers, working papers, etc) to help you decide which type of publication will best suit your purposes. The concluding chapter discusses how you can improve discoverability of your publications. Each chapter has questions to help you apply the information to your own situation.
Peer Review
This Short Guide provides an overview of what peer review is and why it’s important, along with practical advice for both authors and reviewers. Guided by the principle that peer review supports academic writing, topics include the emotional work involved in writing and receiving reviews, and advice on finding time to review.
for grad students, i think the last two short guides, Scholarly Publishing and Peer Review, are particularly useful. especially if there are holes in what your department has or hasn’t given you training around, these guides are in some ways a replacement for the seminar or advisor taking you aside and letting you see how the wheels turn.
if you’ve ever wondered how and when to approach a publisher, how to vet a journal, the differences between publishing an article and a piece in an edited collection, well, there are answers here for you in Scholarly Publishing. the advice is broad enough to be useful for people in many different disciplines (although most pertinent to those in the humanities and social sciences, where there are more distinctions between types of publications) without being prescriptive. in addition to information to help demystify the process, there are really productive reflection questions sprinkled throughout to give you a framework to think about what ideas could or should live where.
my favorite part of the Peer Review short guide is that it begins from the premise that soliciting, receiving, and responding to criticism about your work is an emotional as well as intellectual process. like the other short guides, it contains a masterful balance of useful, clear explanations of terms and processes, and reflection spaces for you to unpack the process and support yourself. especially as more and more junior colleagues are being asked to participate in the peer review process, the view and how-tos from both author and editor are invaluable in understanding how the process works beyond just your comments, given or written.
all four of the short guides are also concluded with meticulous reference and further reading sections. i found myself bookmarking all kinds of sources for myself, and i do this professionally - so i can scarcely imagine how useful these resources will be to those just starting out on the journey of academic writing.
if you’re looking to learn more about the books, listen to a sample, or pick them up for yourself, you can do here - i recommend them highly to anyone who just wants to know how the process works, and how best to support themselves within it.
**I received these books as review copies, but all my opinions here are my own and in no way compensated. I just think these are really help for grad students!!