Writing Reviewer-Friendly Manuscripts
Workshop
 

Duration

6 hours (full day or two half-days)

Synopsis

The goal of this workshop is to help educators write clear and compelling manuscripts and avoid writing errors that raise red flags (warning signals) in the minds of reviewers. Participants review common academic writing problems and practice "wordsmithing" (text editing) to enhance clarity of manuscripts. Participants also learn the bookends approach for writing single concept paragraphs. Writing strategies for each of the sections of a research manuscript are demonstrated with examples. Reasons for rejection of manuscripts are described, and participants learn about journal editors' and reviewers' expectations and pet peeves. Participants critique a manuscript based on guidelines introduced in the workshop and compare their evaluation to the actual feedback and recommendations submitted by reviewers.
   
 

Objectives

At the conclusion of this workshop, participants will be able to:

  • - Describe characteristics of reviewer-friendly writing for manuscripts.
  • - Identify writing problems that make manuscripts and grant
       applications a "hard read" for reviewers.
  •  - Review text from manuscripts, and make modifications to improve
       clarity based on guidelines learned in the workshop.
  •  - Describe the G-M-C model for writing clear descriptions of
       complicated methodology.
  • - Employ the 4 Cs of academic writing to write reader-friendly
       manuscripts (clear, concise, compelling, and convincing).
  • - Recognize the components of a well-constructed "bookends"
       paragraph.

Workshop Agenda

1. Reader-friendly writing strategies and wordsmithing practice.

2. Writing tips for journal articles reporting original
    research/homework         

  • Abstract
  • Background and significance
  • Methods section: major emphasis on this section
  • Reporting the results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion

3. Tables, figures, and references.

4. What do editors and reviewers expect? Reviewers' red flags and
    expectations.

5. You are the reviewer: critique this manuscript.

If you would like additional information or would like to schedule this workshop at your institution, please contact the Academy for Academic Leadership.
 

Back