Journal publication – writing an abstract, reading peer reviews and writing revisions

A workshop for PhD-candidates on November 24-25, 2016. The aims of this seminar is to: to develop strategies for getting published, to improve the early paper draft or preliminary analysis, to develop skills in writing a successful abstract for an international journal, and to improve the skills for interpreting and responding to feedback from peer reviewers.

Program (PDF)

Organiser: Department of Teacher Education and School Research in collaboration with the research group “Curriculum Studies, Educational Leadership and Governance” (CLEG)

Location: University of Oslo, Helga Eng’s House, Room 231

Dates: November 24th-25th, 2016

Responsible: Professor Jorunn Møller, ILS, University of Oslo and Adjunct Professor Helen Gunter, University of Oslo (Professor of Education Policy University of Manchester, UK).

Registration: Registration form
Registration deadline: November 10th, 2016

Maximum number of participants is 15.

The first day of the seminar will focus on developing strategies for getting published, including writing a successful abstract. Each participant is asked to bring with them a draft (an unfinished manuscript or part of analysis) which still may be altered, reframed and re-analyzed. Each PhD candidate will be asked to give a short presentation of the article (15 minutes), the rationale behind the choice of the journal, and an explanation on how the article fit with the purpose, genre and content of the journal.

If possible please submit your draft by November 13th (November 17th at the latest). The draft can be sent to Jorunn Møller.

There will be two discussants for each draft article, one senior researcher and one PhD candidate. The feedback will be given in relation to:

  • quality of research questions, theoretical- and analytical framing, line of arguments and findings
  • the composition and the quality of writing
  • relevance to the journal's scope and purpose

The second day of the seminar will focus on reading and responding to peer-reviews, with an emphasis of the revision process. Peer reviews of scientific articles are employed to maintain standards, improve the quality of published work, and provide credibility, and journal editors provide criteria lists to guide reviewers’ comments and evaluations. Peer responses have helped many to better understand the “nuts and bolts” of professional writing in our field.  

Although reviewers' feed-back and advice sometimes can be easy to follow, the review process can also give authors many challenges. How do we best meet the reviewers' suggestions for change and what do we do when reviewers disagree among themselves or we disagree with the reviewers' suggestions?


Recommended pre-reading:

Thomson, P. & Kamler, B. (2004). Driven to abstraction: doctoral supervision and writing pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education, 9(2), 195-209.

Thomson, P. & Kamler, B. (2013). Writing for peer reviewed journals. Strategies for getting published. Routledge.


Publisert 19. mai 2016 15:15 - Sist endret 21. jan. 2021 15:43