Content uploaded by Annie Selden
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Annie Selden on Feb 16, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
MPWR 2018 Writing and Publishing workshop, 3:45-4:45pm, February 21, 2018
Jackie Dewar (jdewar@lmu.edu), Kristen Lew (kristen.lew@txstate.edu),
Annie Selden (aselden@nmsu.edu)
Workshop Plan
Initial Think-Pair-Share Prompt:
What are some challenges or problems you have concerning writing and publishing?
Workshop Outline
1. Finding time/space/support for the actual writing
2. Choosing a journal
3. What to do, or not do, to improve your chances of acceptance
4. An overview of the submission/publication process
5. What to expect and do when you get criticism/rejection
Segment 1. Finding time/space/support for the actual writing
The research on writing productivity says several, sometimes conflicting, things:
• Commit to writing at least 30 minutes, 5 days a week [1, 2]
• Don’t bother with trying to write every day, and lose the guilt about that [4]
• Find (start) a writing support/accountability group [2, 3]
• Figure out what is (not) working [2]
Bottom line: The best approach to writing is what works for you!
[1] Boice, R. (1990). Professors as writers: A self-help guide to productive writing. Stillwater, OK:
New Forums Press.
[2] Rockquemore, Kerry Ann. (2017). What’s Holding You Back (in Your Research and Writing).
Tomorrow’s Professor, Posting #1618, Stanford University.
https://tomprof.stanford.edu/posting/1618
[3] Silvia, P. (2007). How to write a lot. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
[4] Sword, H. (2016). ‘Write every day!’: a mantra dismantled. International Journal for
Academic Development, 21(4), 312–322.
REFLECTION/ACTION PROMPTS: What sort of action, change, or support would help me in my
writing? What is my timeline for this?
Segment 2. Choosing a journal
Some general advice:
• Find out which journals publish RUME (e.g., [5]).
• Pick the journal first. Then write the article to fit that journal, paying attention to the
style/formatting and page length requirements.
• Look over recent rankings of math ed research journals (e.g., [6], [7]) to see how
journals are ranked in the field.
• Look at the acceptance rate information (e.g., [8]).
• Look at the Aims and Scope (on the journal’s website) and read a few articles first.
• Decide based on the journal’s appropriateness for your manuscript, the journal’s
prestige, its acceptance rate (which influences the chances of getting published).
[5] Journals that publish RUME: http://sigmaa.maa.org/rume/journals.html.
[6] Toerner, G., & Arzarello, F. (December 2012). Grading mathematics education research
journals. EMS Newsletter of the European Mathematical Society, 86, 52-54. Available online.
[7] Williams, S. R., & Leatham, K. R. (2017). Journal quality in mathematics education. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(4), 369-396.
[8] Acceptance rate information at
https://sites.google.com/site/ditmerg/journals or
https://mathedjournals.wikispaces.com/Math-Ed-Only+Journals.
Segment 3. What to do, or not do, to improve your chances of acceptance
• Make sure your article is a good fit for the journal. This begins with journal choice,
writing for that audience, and attending to style, format, and length restrictions as
described in Segment 2.
• It is possible to send a query letter containing an abstract or short description of the
article to the editor to inquire about fit (see [9]). The letter can also explain why the
article might be of interest to the editor and journal readers, detail any grants or awards
that supported the research. If there is a specific concern (say the article describes a
study that is smaller than typically appears in the journal) include a question aimed at
determining the chance of acceptance in light of that factor.
• Have a significant research question, well-situated in the literature, and employ
appropriate methodology to address it. Acknowledge limitations and future avenues for
related research.
• Have colleagues, peers, or mentors read and comment on your writing.
[9] Belcher, W. 2009. Writing Your Journal Article in Twelve Weeks: A Guide to Academic
Publishing Success. Thousands Oaks: SAGE Publications
Segment 4. An overview of the submission/publication process
• Does it go to someone before an editor? Usually not. The editor may send it to an
associate editor for handling (in the case of ESM).
• How does the editor choose reviewers? The editor or associate editor tries to pick
reviewers who have expertise in the area (however, the editor or associate editor
cannot overburden reviewers). For ESM, two reviewers must belong to the Editorial
Board. For JRME, at least one should be on the Editorial Board.
• How long should you expect the review process to take? While most journals now ask
reviewers to take just 28 days, it takes time to get reviewers and time to process the
reviews and any backlog. So 4 months is about right.
• How long do you wait before you contact the editor/journal? About 4-6 months is
reasonable. Do not wait a year.
• If you get an R&R, what next? Do you have to follow all of the suggestions of the
reviewers? You do not need to follow all the suggestions of reviewers (some are in
conflict). You do need to respond to all the suggestions in a separate cover sheet. This
often goes to the next set of reviewers (even if they did not review the initial
manuscript).
• Can you contact the editor while you’re revising? Yes, if you have a pressing question.
Definitely yes, if you want an extension of time.
• How do you write the letter that goes with a revised manuscript? Since the submission
of the revision is also online, there may not need to be a letter, just the response to the
editor’s and reviewers’ suggestions.
• After a paper is accepted, what next? Sometimes, you will be asked to proof the pages
for typos, but no major changes.
• How long do you have to wait for the paper to be in press? Depends on the journal.
Segment 5. What to expect and do when your paper gets critically reviewed or rejected.
• Expect to feel bad! It’s the natural/human reaction.
• After reading them, set them aside for a day or two; then read them again, and get to
work.
• Respond to each review comment, and clearly indicate what changes were made.
For example, if a reviewer says: “how the responses were coded is not clear,” rather
than responding “we clarified how the responses were coded,” say: “we added more
detail about the coding on page 12, lines 6–20.”
• Make all requested changes that do no harm as well as ones that improve the
manuscript. When you disagree about making a change, explain why, but do so in a
respectful and factual manner.
• Note and meet all deadlines for resubmission.
• If manuscript was rejected, before submitting the article to another journal consider
making changes based on the reviewers’ and editor’s comments.
Worksheet/Notes
Initial Think-Pair-Share Prompt:
What are some challenges or problems you have concerning writing and publishing?
Segment 1 Reflection/Action Prompts:
What sort of action, change, or support would help me in my writing? What is my timeline?
Other Notes:
