Writing to get published in STEM education research 2022

Course centent

Analytical tools to align PhD research projects with international norms; reading research; writing research in STEM education; writing and revising publication ready articles. Strategic and meta-strategic considerations when publishing in an international context; basic tools and foci for scholarly writing; norms and genres and bad practice; responding to reviews; simulated review from our roles as reviewers

 

In this course, STEM education researchers begin by analysing their PhD projects from a Toulminian perspective to gain insights into their work from a substantiated ‘claim’ perspective. They use these insights to write a publishable article from any point in their PhD project. Their goal is to take their initial article ideas to completion by the end of the course. They will be guided in scholarly writing, review and revision skills by four faculty who review extensively for international STEM. The guest researchers and the teachers from SCIENCE have collaborated on the elements from this course both in a previous SCIENCE PhD courses and multiple times at the European Science Education Research Association summer school. Among them, the four faculty who teach this course have extensive publishing, editorial and reviewing experience in STEM education research.

The four faculty are:

Robert Evans, Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen

Britta Eyrich Jessen, Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen

Alexander Kauertz, Institut für naturwissenschaftliche Bildung – Physikdidaktik, Universität Koblenz-Landau

Eliza Rybska, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan

 

At least half-way though their PhD studies. From any European country.

 

 

  • outline of paper from PhD project and abstract
  • names of two or three journals where they may want to publish and why they are appropriate
  • browse a couple of papers from one or two of the journals in which they want to publish and compare and contrast the idiosyncratic characteristics of each journal’s papers

 

  • Full Toulmin concept workshop, including layers of Toulmin mapping
  • Mapping one of the two papers reviewed beforehand to explore and consider the potential and limitations of the mapping for understanding the argumentative structure of the paper. Compare and contrast the mappings of others to validate the impression. Align the mapping results with the idiosyncratic characteristics of the journals. Elaborate the status of their own paper so they can align a targeted journal’s paper with the present status of their own
  • Meet with small working groups to review the mapping and generalize about the selected journals. Each of four groups will be lead by one of the four course faculty.
  • Map something temporal and write a review using style from the workshop between
  • Share reviews based on first days’ lessons with small working groups. Establish mutual goals for small group progress
  • Introduce Internet tools useful in writing papers for publication.
  • Differentiate between targeted journals etc. based on expertise of faculty as actual editorial review board members of a range of relevant journals

 

  • Write a first draft of the two sections: Introduction and theoretical background of the target paper, where you point to the gap in research your work address and formulate your research question(s). Exchange them within the small group within two weeks.
  • Give feedback to the small group member with whom each is paired about the extent to which the initial writing aligns with the targeted journal(s) a week before the second general two day meeting.
  • Provide 1-2 pages describing your data and ideas for a methodology

 

  • Examine one page of each participant’s work, compared to the review report received and in smaller groups formulate actions to be taken and answers for reviewers
  • Plenum sessions sharing main points to work on from first review round
  • In smaller groups each participant presents their products to date, including first descriptions of data and methodology
  • Massaging their data (qualitative and quantitative) to further reveal the status of their current project
  • Improve the written sections based on feedback from a class member and faculty mentor including a first draft of the methodology.
  • strategies and aides in visualizations with extant examples and tools. Workshop by Eliza preparing them for further work with their data.

 

  • submit a coherent draft of paper 10 days before final meeting
  • mentors will provide authentic reviews for each of the students in their smaller group, using international journal protocols based on the journals to which the students plan to submit
  • second reviewers will be other participant reviews also from their own smaller groups
  • each small group reads all of the other small group papers before final two day meeting

 

  • submitted papers have been reviewed by faculty and one other participant beforehand and those reviews will be shared and interpretations and future actions based on those reviews will be discussed in each smaller group
  • share peer reviews first and then compare to faculty reviews to validate peer usefulness
  • How to respond to editor reviews and comments using the ones we actually make
  • Workshop on editorial letters, reviews and responses based on the experiences from teacher group
  • Start producing your response for the reviews you have received
  • Form participant review partners (between institutions) for the final papers before submission
  • Set up a realistic time-line for each participant on completion and submission of their papers for publication
  • Evaluate the course work regarding expectations and own goals, identify needs for further support

 

  • Submit the final version of your paper along with your answer to reviewers according to the agreed time-line
  • Please inform us of the progress of your paper with actual journals – we would love to celebrate your victories with you!

 

  • Preparation/self-study 60 Hours
  • Course hours 48 Hours
  • Evaluation/reporting 26 Hours

 

Registration is free of charge; participants are required to cover any and all costs pertaining to travel, room and board during the course.

 

Please send an application to Robert Evans
Deadline for registration January 31, 2022.

 

Department of Science Education
Rådmandsgade 64
2200 Copenhagen N