I talk to people about their writing a lot. Every so often I meet someone who has been on a roll with writing, but finds themselves stuck in a rut where they can no longer move forward. After talking about their project, it often becomes clear that they are having trouble moving forward because they are at a new stage of writing.
For example, “Karla” recently told me that she was having trouble finding the time for writing over the past week. I found this unusual because the last time we talked, she was excited about her project and its long-term possibilities. After talking for a bit, it became clear that Karla was no longer at the stage of brainstorming and creating new ideas, but that she was now at the stage where she had to pull everything together and massage her outstanding work into a coherent, scholarly, whole. It turned out that not only did Karla find this kind of work less exciting, but also that getting near to the end of the project made her nervous about going public with her ideas.
There are different stages to the writing process, and we draw from different sorts of energies to complete each stage. Most of us excel at one stage, but do less well at others. It can be helpful to reflect on the various stages of writing and to become aware of which stages you like best. Here are the stages, as I see them:
Stage 1: Conception – This is when you are coming up with ideas and writing the first rough draft. The best way to get through this stage is to not be inhibited by perfectionism and not worry about grammar, coherency, or format, but to just get your ideas onto paper. When you are at this stage, it is best to do this first thing in the morning when your ideas are fresh and you are ready to forge ahead. Although this is the most exciting stage for many, it also is the stage when we are most unsure of where we are going, and thus can be subject to feelings of self-doubt about the worth of our work. If you are stuck at this stage, one strategy is to put a pillow-case over your computer screen and just type away for fifteen to thirty minutes. Not being able to see your writing will help you to feel less threatened by the blank screen and less inclined to go back and correct errors.
Stage 2: Pulling together – This is when you re-organize your free-writes, brainstorms, previous work, and literature summaries into a coherent first draft. Some people do this on the screen; others cut and paste using real scissors and paper. Whatever you do, it is important to think about how you think and organize best and develop a system that allows you to create a coherent first draft. At this stage, you might find yourself staring at documents on and off-screen and struggling to decide on the best format. Despair not: If you are working on this every day, those ideas are percolating in your head, and you soon will come up with a workable format. If you are feeling stuck, try printing out your documents and using a creative, visual format of re-organizing your ideas such as cutting and pasting pieces of colored paper onto a corkboard.
Stage 3: Revision – This is when you have a complete first draft and are ready to make it better. It can be very helpful to give this first draft to a trusted colleague, telling them that this is your first shot at the paper, and that you are looking for constructive feedback on organization and suggestions for expanding the background and theoretical literature. Some people do revisions by hand by printing out each version. Others are comfortable doing edits on screen. When I am in the revision stage, I like to carry a copy around with me, so that I can squeeze in edits whenever I have time. If you are stuck at this stage, the best solution can be to find someone to read and give you positive feedback to help you move forward.
Stage 4: Copy-editing and References – At this stage, you have a complete, revised draft with your conceptual framework, literature review data, analysis, introduction, and conclusion, all in order. You just need to dot the i’s, cross the t’s, check your citations and run your spell-check. If you are stuck at this stage, hiring a professional editor can be a fabulous investment.
Stage 5: Submit – You are finished, and just need to figure out the online or mail-in process to submit your work! If you are stuck at this stage, it could be helpful to talk to friends who have read your work, know how fabulous it is, and can encourage you to press the “submit” button sooner rather than later!
It helps my productivity to be aware that there are different kinds of writing, and that my energy and concentration levels determine which kind of writing I can do most effectively. Creating new prose takes the most concentration for me, and I usually like to do this when I have a bit more time to reflect and process information. Line-editing, on the other hand, I can do even if I have just five minutes to look at a paragraph.
When you plan for your writing for the coming week, it might be helpful to look at your calendar and figure out what sorts of tasks you are best able to do each day. If you don’t teach on Monday, that might be the best day to draft a new section or to re-organize Chapter Two. On Tuesday morning, you might have fifteen minutes before preparing for class to check the bibliography for that almost-completed article.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
The Twelve Steps from Dissertation to Book
When I finished my dissertation, I knew I wanted to publish it as a book. I did not, however, have any idea how to publish a book. As I am now at the very end of this long process, I think it is important to outline the steps so that others can know how it works.
I will explain how this generally works. However, keep two things in mind: 1) there is a lot of variation beyond what I describe here and 2) this is generally the process for the first book, not necessarily for the second or third.
Step One: Write the Prospectus. Although it seems daunting, a book prospectus is not a complex document. It contains: 1) a summary of your book that outlines the main argument; 2) a one-paragraph summary of each chapter; 3) a timeline for completion of the book manuscript; 4) a brief description of the target audience and potential classes for course adoption; and 5) the competing literature. Usually these are short documents. Mine have ranged from four to seven single-spaced pages.
Step Two: Submit the Prospectus. Find publishers who might be interested in your book manuscript, and send them the prospectus. Often, they also will want one or two sample chapters. You can send your prospectus to as many publishers as you like. Most publishers list submission guidelines on their websites. These guidelines often indicate exactly what materials they would like to see: usually a prospectus, one or two sample chapters, and a two page CV.
Step Three: Submit the Manuscript. When acquisitions editors receive your prospectus, they make a decision as to whether or not they would like to send your book manuscript out for review. If they do not, they will send you a letter with their regrets. However, if they are interested, they often will call or email you with a request to see more materials. Some presses want to wait for the whole book manuscript to be completed. Others will send out just the prospectus for review. Others will send out 1-4 finished chapters. That depends on the book and the press. They will let you know.
Step Four: The Press Sends Your Manuscript out for Review. You wait between one and twelve months for the reviews to come back. If just the prospectus is under review, this will not take very long. If it is the whole manuscript, usually you will wait several months.
Step Five: You Get a Contract. The press makes a decision based on the reviews. They can decide to a) offer a contract based on the reviews; b) ask you to do more revisions and send it out for review again or c) decline to offer a contract based on the reviews. If it is c), you go back to Step Two.
Step Six: You Sign a Contract. If the reviews are favorable, the press will offer you a contract, which you first negotiate and then sign. Here are some items often up for negotiation: 1) who will pay for the index; 2) who pays for the cover and inside pictures; 3) who pays for the copy-editing; 4) the royalties rate; and 5) when and whether the book will be released in paperback.
Step Seven: You Revise the Manuscript. You revise the manuscript based on the reviews. Some presses will send it out for review again once you revise it. Others will review it internally and ask you to make further revisions. Still others will send it as is to the copy-editor after you make your revisions.
Step Eight: Copy-Editing. Once the book manuscript is revised, it goes to the copy-editor and they proofread the text. This usually takes 1 to 3 months.
Step Nine: Revision. You revise it again, based on the suggestions made by the copy-editor. You then send it back to the copy-editor who sends it to the press after your final approval. You usually have one month to respond to the copy edits.
Step Ten: Page Proofs. Your book is put into page proofs that you get to read and revise again. At this stage, however, you can only make very minor changes. You correct any mistakes and then it goes to the printer.
Step Eleven: In Press. Your book gets printed. This usually takes a couple of months.
Step Twelve: On the Shelf. Your book is available for sale!
As made clear in these twelve steps, publishing an academic book is often a very long process. It is important to keep in mind that it can take years to publish a book, even after you have completed the manuscript. For example, I completed the manuscript for my first book in May 2009 and sent it to a publisher who had agreed to review it. I received the reviews in November 2009, and the publisher offered me a contract on the basis of the reviewers’ evaluations. I signed the contract and then revised the book according to the suggested revisions and returned it to the publisher in March 2010. In June 2010, I received and reviewed the copy-edits. In October 2010, I received and reviewed the page proofs. The book will be out in February 2011 – nearly two years after I had originally “finished” the book manuscript! Keeping this timetable in mind is particularly important if your university prefers you to have a bound book when you go up for tenure.
I will explain how this generally works. However, keep two things in mind: 1) there is a lot of variation beyond what I describe here and 2) this is generally the process for the first book, not necessarily for the second or third.
Step One: Write the Prospectus. Although it seems daunting, a book prospectus is not a complex document. It contains: 1) a summary of your book that outlines the main argument; 2) a one-paragraph summary of each chapter; 3) a timeline for completion of the book manuscript; 4) a brief description of the target audience and potential classes for course adoption; and 5) the competing literature. Usually these are short documents. Mine have ranged from four to seven single-spaced pages.
Step Two: Submit the Prospectus. Find publishers who might be interested in your book manuscript, and send them the prospectus. Often, they also will want one or two sample chapters. You can send your prospectus to as many publishers as you like. Most publishers list submission guidelines on their websites. These guidelines often indicate exactly what materials they would like to see: usually a prospectus, one or two sample chapters, and a two page CV.
Step Three: Submit the Manuscript. When acquisitions editors receive your prospectus, they make a decision as to whether or not they would like to send your book manuscript out for review. If they do not, they will send you a letter with their regrets. However, if they are interested, they often will call or email you with a request to see more materials. Some presses want to wait for the whole book manuscript to be completed. Others will send out just the prospectus for review. Others will send out 1-4 finished chapters. That depends on the book and the press. They will let you know.
Step Four: The Press Sends Your Manuscript out for Review. You wait between one and twelve months for the reviews to come back. If just the prospectus is under review, this will not take very long. If it is the whole manuscript, usually you will wait several months.
Step Five: You Get a Contract. The press makes a decision based on the reviews. They can decide to a) offer a contract based on the reviews; b) ask you to do more revisions and send it out for review again or c) decline to offer a contract based on the reviews. If it is c), you go back to Step Two.
Step Six: You Sign a Contract. If the reviews are favorable, the press will offer you a contract, which you first negotiate and then sign. Here are some items often up for negotiation: 1) who will pay for the index; 2) who pays for the cover and inside pictures; 3) who pays for the copy-editing; 4) the royalties rate; and 5) when and whether the book will be released in paperback.
Step Seven: You Revise the Manuscript. You revise the manuscript based on the reviews. Some presses will send it out for review again once you revise it. Others will review it internally and ask you to make further revisions. Still others will send it as is to the copy-editor after you make your revisions.
Step Eight: Copy-Editing. Once the book manuscript is revised, it goes to the copy-editor and they proofread the text. This usually takes 1 to 3 months.
Step Nine: Revision. You revise it again, based on the suggestions made by the copy-editor. You then send it back to the copy-editor who sends it to the press after your final approval. You usually have one month to respond to the copy edits.
Step Ten: Page Proofs. Your book is put into page proofs that you get to read and revise again. At this stage, however, you can only make very minor changes. You correct any mistakes and then it goes to the printer.
Step Eleven: In Press. Your book gets printed. This usually takes a couple of months.
Step Twelve: On the Shelf. Your book is available for sale!
As made clear in these twelve steps, publishing an academic book is often a very long process. It is important to keep in mind that it can take years to publish a book, even after you have completed the manuscript. For example, I completed the manuscript for my first book in May 2009 and sent it to a publisher who had agreed to review it. I received the reviews in November 2009, and the publisher offered me a contract on the basis of the reviewers’ evaluations. I signed the contract and then revised the book according to the suggested revisions and returned it to the publisher in March 2010. In June 2010, I received and reviewed the copy-edits. In October 2010, I received and reviewed the page proofs. The book will be out in February 2011 – nearly two years after I had originally “finished” the book manuscript! Keeping this timetable in mind is particularly important if your university prefers you to have a bound book when you go up for tenure.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Six Steps to Writing a Literature Review
In their book, Destination Dissertation: A Traveler's Guide to a Done Dissertation
, Sonja Foss and William Walters have a chapter that describes a highly efficient way of writing a literature review. I think it provides an excellent guide for getting through the massive amounts of literature in any field.
Step One: Define the area you will be studying. Before you begin to search for articles or books, decide beforehand what areas you are going to research. Make sure that you only get articles and books in that area, even if you come across fascinating books in other areas.
Step Two: Gather the literature. Conduct a comprehensive bibliographic search of books and articles in your area. Read the abstracts online and download and print those articles that pertain to your area of research. Find books in the library that are relevant and check them out.
Step Three: Find relevant excerpts. Skim the contents of each book and article and look for these five things:
1) Claims, conclusions, and findings about the constructs you are investigating
2) Definitions of terms
3) Calls for follow-up studies relevant to your project
4) Gaps you notice in the literature
5) Disagreement about the constructs you are investigating
When you find any of these five things, type the relevant excerpt directly into a Word document. Don’t summarize, as that takes longer than just typing the excerpt. Make sure to note the name of the author and the page number following the passage. Do this for each article and book that you have in your stack of literature. When you are done, print out the document.
Step Four: Code the literature. Get out a pair of scissors and cut each note apart. Now, sort the pieces of paper into similar topics. Figure out what the main themes are and place the notes each into a pile. Make sure that each note goes into a pile. If there are excerpts that you can’t figure out where they belong, separate those and go over them again at the end to see if you need new categories. When you finish, place each stack of notes into an envelope labeled with the name of the theme.
Step Five: Create your conceptual schema. Go to your computer and type, in large font, the name of each of your coded themes. Print this out, and cut the themes into individual slips of paper. Take the slips of paper to a table or large workspace and figure out the best way to organize them. Are there ideas that go together or that are in dialogue with each other? Are there ideas that contradict each other? Move around the slips of paper until you come up with a way of organizing the codes that makes sense. Write the conceptual schema down before you forget or someone cleans up your slips of paper!
Step Six: Write it up. Choose any section of your conceptual schema to begin with. You can begin anywhere, because you already know the order. Find the envelope with the excerpts in them and lay them on the table in front of you. Figure out a mini-conceptual schema based on that theme by grouping together those excerpts that say the same thing. Use that mini-conceptual schema to write up your literature review based on the excerpts that you have in front of you. Don’t forget to include the citations as you write, so as not to lose track of who said what. Repeat this for each section of your literature review.
Once you complete these six steps, you will have a complete draft of your literature review. The great thing about this process is that it breaks down into manageable steps something that seems enormous: writing a literature review.
I think that Foss and Walter’s system for writing the literature review really can work for a dissertation, because a Ph.D. candidate has already read widely in his or her field through graduate seminars and comprehensive exams.
It may be more challenging for M.A. students, unless you are already familiar with the literature. It is always hard to figure out how much you need to read for deep meaning, and how much you just need to know what others have said. That balance will depend on how much you already know.
For faculty writing literature reviews for articles, this system also could work, especially when you are writing in a field you are already familiar with. The mere fact of having a system can make the literature review seem much less daunting, so I recommend this system for anyone who feels overwhelmed by the prospect of writing a literature review.
, Sonja Foss and William Walters have a chapter that describes a highly efficient way of writing a literature review. I think it provides an excellent guide for getting through the massive amounts of literature in any field. Step One: Define the area you will be studying. Before you begin to search for articles or books, decide beforehand what areas you are going to research. Make sure that you only get articles and books in that area, even if you come across fascinating books in other areas.
Step Two: Gather the literature. Conduct a comprehensive bibliographic search of books and articles in your area. Read the abstracts online and download and print those articles that pertain to your area of research. Find books in the library that are relevant and check them out.
Step Three: Find relevant excerpts. Skim the contents of each book and article and look for these five things:
1) Claims, conclusions, and findings about the constructs you are investigating
2) Definitions of terms
3) Calls for follow-up studies relevant to your project
4) Gaps you notice in the literature
5) Disagreement about the constructs you are investigating
When you find any of these five things, type the relevant excerpt directly into a Word document. Don’t summarize, as that takes longer than just typing the excerpt. Make sure to note the name of the author and the page number following the passage. Do this for each article and book that you have in your stack of literature. When you are done, print out the document.
Step Four: Code the literature. Get out a pair of scissors and cut each note apart. Now, sort the pieces of paper into similar topics. Figure out what the main themes are and place the notes each into a pile. Make sure that each note goes into a pile. If there are excerpts that you can’t figure out where they belong, separate those and go over them again at the end to see if you need new categories. When you finish, place each stack of notes into an envelope labeled with the name of the theme.
Step Five: Create your conceptual schema. Go to your computer and type, in large font, the name of each of your coded themes. Print this out, and cut the themes into individual slips of paper. Take the slips of paper to a table or large workspace and figure out the best way to organize them. Are there ideas that go together or that are in dialogue with each other? Are there ideas that contradict each other? Move around the slips of paper until you come up with a way of organizing the codes that makes sense. Write the conceptual schema down before you forget or someone cleans up your slips of paper!
Step Six: Write it up. Choose any section of your conceptual schema to begin with. You can begin anywhere, because you already know the order. Find the envelope with the excerpts in them and lay them on the table in front of you. Figure out a mini-conceptual schema based on that theme by grouping together those excerpts that say the same thing. Use that mini-conceptual schema to write up your literature review based on the excerpts that you have in front of you. Don’t forget to include the citations as you write, so as not to lose track of who said what. Repeat this for each section of your literature review.
Once you complete these six steps, you will have a complete draft of your literature review. The great thing about this process is that it breaks down into manageable steps something that seems enormous: writing a literature review.
I think that Foss and Walter’s system for writing the literature review really can work for a dissertation, because a Ph.D. candidate has already read widely in his or her field through graduate seminars and comprehensive exams.
It may be more challenging for M.A. students, unless you are already familiar with the literature. It is always hard to figure out how much you need to read for deep meaning, and how much you just need to know what others have said. That balance will depend on how much you already know.
For faculty writing literature reviews for articles, this system also could work, especially when you are writing in a field you are already familiar with. The mere fact of having a system can make the literature review seem much less daunting, so I recommend this system for anyone who feels overwhelmed by the prospect of writing a literature review.
Friday, September 24, 2010
How to be an effective mentor
A few weeks ago, I had lunch with my colleague, Mary, who is in her third year of a tenure track position. As we were waiting for our food to arrive, I asked Mary about her progress on her book project. In our conversation, I pointed out two things: 1) You can submit your book prospectus to multiple publishers and 2) It is advisable to try and publish at least one article out of your book manuscript to draw attention to your work and to gain credibility in the field. Mary lowered her voice and said to me “Tanya, I can’t believe no one has ever told me this before.”
I couldn’t believe it either. I asked Mary who her assigned mentor was. She told me about Jane, a gregarious associate professor who often invited Mary over to dinner and told her how fantastic and brilliant her scholarship was. Jane was providing one kind of mentoring – support and encouragement – but was not giving Jane all she needed to succeed. Jane was depending on this one mentor for all of her needs when, in fact, she requires a variety of mentors to help her on her path towards tenure. In this post, I will explain some of the kinds of help mentors can provide. This information is intended to help both new faculty see what kinds of mentoring to seek out and senior faculty to think of kinds of mentoring they can provide.
1. Support and encouragement. Tenure track faculty need to feel valued, included, and supported. It is crucial for mentors to let new faculty know what their strengths are and to help them build those strengths. This kind of mentoring is particularly important for under-represented faculty who may feel excluded in their departments.
2. Feedback on work in progress. It is essential for academics to have people in their field to whom they can send work for feedback before sending it out for review. Mentors can offer and provide valuable feedback on articles and manuscripts in progress.
3. Advice on professional development. It is often unclear to new faculty just what they need to do in order to be successful in the areas of research, teaching and service. More senior colleagues can explain how to achieve and demonstrate excellence in these areas.
4. Clear expectations for research productivity. Very few junior faculty are clear on just what they will need to achieve tenure. Mentors can help junior faculty to understand what the expectations are in their department, at the university, and at the national level.
5. How and where to publish. It is not always obvious to junior faculty which outlets are most suitable for their research. In some departments, book chapters in edited volumes count for very little, for example. It is important to help junior faculty figure out how and where they need to publish as soon as possible in their career.
6. Strategies for success. Successful new faculty write every day, limit their teaching preparation, and seek out advice from their colleagues. These are strategies that can be learned, and mentors can help new faculty to implement these and other strategies for success.
7. Role models. New faculty need to see successful people similar to them to envision their own success. Faculty of color will do better when they have successful role models who are also people of color. Women faculty can benefit from seeing successful women in their department. Parents with children can learn how faculty with children balance life and work by learning from successful role models.
These are just some of the ways that mentors can be helpful to new faculty. No mentor can or should be expected to take on all of these roles. For this reason, new faculty must also seek out several mentors to ensure that all of their needs are being met. And, senior faculty should provide mentorship in their own areas of strength.
I couldn’t believe it either. I asked Mary who her assigned mentor was. She told me about Jane, a gregarious associate professor who often invited Mary over to dinner and told her how fantastic and brilliant her scholarship was. Jane was providing one kind of mentoring – support and encouragement – but was not giving Jane all she needed to succeed. Jane was depending on this one mentor for all of her needs when, in fact, she requires a variety of mentors to help her on her path towards tenure. In this post, I will explain some of the kinds of help mentors can provide. This information is intended to help both new faculty see what kinds of mentoring to seek out and senior faculty to think of kinds of mentoring they can provide.
1. Support and encouragement. Tenure track faculty need to feel valued, included, and supported. It is crucial for mentors to let new faculty know what their strengths are and to help them build those strengths. This kind of mentoring is particularly important for under-represented faculty who may feel excluded in their departments.
2. Feedback on work in progress. It is essential for academics to have people in their field to whom they can send work for feedback before sending it out for review. Mentors can offer and provide valuable feedback on articles and manuscripts in progress.
3. Advice on professional development. It is often unclear to new faculty just what they need to do in order to be successful in the areas of research, teaching and service. More senior colleagues can explain how to achieve and demonstrate excellence in these areas.
4. Clear expectations for research productivity. Very few junior faculty are clear on just what they will need to achieve tenure. Mentors can help junior faculty to understand what the expectations are in their department, at the university, and at the national level.
5. How and where to publish. It is not always obvious to junior faculty which outlets are most suitable for their research. In some departments, book chapters in edited volumes count for very little, for example. It is important to help junior faculty figure out how and where they need to publish as soon as possible in their career.
6. Strategies for success. Successful new faculty write every day, limit their teaching preparation, and seek out advice from their colleagues. These are strategies that can be learned, and mentors can help new faculty to implement these and other strategies for success.
7. Role models. New faculty need to see successful people similar to them to envision their own success. Faculty of color will do better when they have successful role models who are also people of color. Women faculty can benefit from seeing successful women in their department. Parents with children can learn how faculty with children balance life and work by learning from successful role models.
These are just some of the ways that mentors can be helpful to new faculty. No mentor can or should be expected to take on all of these roles. For this reason, new faculty must also seek out several mentors to ensure that all of their needs are being met. And, senior faculty should provide mentorship in their own areas of strength.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Five kinds of mentors new faculty need
In Robert Boice’s book, Advice for New Faculty, he points out that successful new faculty share a few crucial characteristics. Successful new faculty:
In this blog, I want to focus on #5: Regularly seek advice from colleagues. When I first read that suggestion, I thought to myself that there was no way my assigned mentor would be willing to talk to me for four hours a week. I was right about that. However, what I did not realize is that I needed to expand my idea of what a mentor was. There are at least five types of mentors new faculty need to be successful:
1) Departmental mentors: These are senior colleagues in your department who can help you to understand and navigate the sometimes turbulent waters of your department. They can do this both by providing advice and by coming to your defense behind closed doors. To do this, they need to talk to you. It is crucial to meet with your departmental mentor at least once a semester.
2) Institutional mentors: These are senior colleagues at your institution, who may or may not be in your department. They play a similar role to your departmental mentor, but are particularly savvy about the way the College and/or University operate and can provide you with crucial guidance. I suggest you meet with your institutional mentor at least once a semester.
3) Teaching mentors: These are senior colleagues who are dedicated to undergraduate and graduate education and can provide you with important feedback on your teaching, as well as ways to become a more effective teacher. This person likely will be in your department, as your departmental colleagues are most familiar with your curriculum. Many universities and colleges require Assistant Professors to have peer reviews of their teaching at least once a year. Whether or not this is the case at your institution, it is important for you to meet with a teaching mentor to discuss your teaching at least once a semester.
4) Peer mentors: These are your junior colleagues or people that you know from graduate school or conferences who are at a similar career stage. These relationships are often easier and more casual, yet can be just as important as those with your senior colleagues. Your peers can provide you with feedback on your work, help you to overcome emotional difficulties, provide you with publishing and speaking opportunities, and lend a sympathetic ear. You should meet with one of your peer mentors, by phone or in person, at least once a month.
5) Disciplinary Mentors: These are people more advanced in their careers that are in your subfield, yet not at your institution. As a new faculty member, you need to make contact with people in your field outside your institution both so that they can know who you are and so that they can inform you of important publishing and speaking opportunities. These are people who you eventually will ask to write letters of recommendation for you, and who may serve as external reviewers on your tenure case. You will need to provide a list of about ten people to serve as external reviewers for your tenure file. I suggest you make that list now, and make a plan to meet, in person, or over the phone, each of those people between now and the time you go up for tenure.
All of that said, I will make one final recommendation. Meeting with colleagues is important, but can also be time consuming. To make time for regular meetings in my busy schedule, I try to schedule most of my meetings over meals, especially lunch. I take time to eat lunch every day anyway, and having lunch with a colleague can both be enjoyable and a way to fit meetings into your busy schedule. I also schedule meetings right after teaching, as I generally am not very productive on any other fronts right after class. As for phone conversations with colleagues at other institutions, I often schedule those at times when I can talk while taking my afternoon or evening walk.
- spent three hours or more per week on scholarly writing.
- integrated their research into their undergraduate classes.
- did not spend major amounts of time on course preparation (after their first semester, they averaged 1–1.5 hours of preparation per lecture hour).
- lectured at a pace that allowed for active student participation.
- regularly sought advice from colleagues, averaging four hours a week on discussions of research and teaching.
In this blog, I want to focus on #5: Regularly seek advice from colleagues. When I first read that suggestion, I thought to myself that there was no way my assigned mentor would be willing to talk to me for four hours a week. I was right about that. However, what I did not realize is that I needed to expand my idea of what a mentor was. There are at least five types of mentors new faculty need to be successful:
1) Departmental mentors: These are senior colleagues in your department who can help you to understand and navigate the sometimes turbulent waters of your department. They can do this both by providing advice and by coming to your defense behind closed doors. To do this, they need to talk to you. It is crucial to meet with your departmental mentor at least once a semester.
2) Institutional mentors: These are senior colleagues at your institution, who may or may not be in your department. They play a similar role to your departmental mentor, but are particularly savvy about the way the College and/or University operate and can provide you with crucial guidance. I suggest you meet with your institutional mentor at least once a semester.
3) Teaching mentors: These are senior colleagues who are dedicated to undergraduate and graduate education and can provide you with important feedback on your teaching, as well as ways to become a more effective teacher. This person likely will be in your department, as your departmental colleagues are most familiar with your curriculum. Many universities and colleges require Assistant Professors to have peer reviews of their teaching at least once a year. Whether or not this is the case at your institution, it is important for you to meet with a teaching mentor to discuss your teaching at least once a semester.
4) Peer mentors: These are your junior colleagues or people that you know from graduate school or conferences who are at a similar career stage. These relationships are often easier and more casual, yet can be just as important as those with your senior colleagues. Your peers can provide you with feedback on your work, help you to overcome emotional difficulties, provide you with publishing and speaking opportunities, and lend a sympathetic ear. You should meet with one of your peer mentors, by phone or in person, at least once a month.
5) Disciplinary Mentors: These are people more advanced in their careers that are in your subfield, yet not at your institution. As a new faculty member, you need to make contact with people in your field outside your institution both so that they can know who you are and so that they can inform you of important publishing and speaking opportunities. These are people who you eventually will ask to write letters of recommendation for you, and who may serve as external reviewers on your tenure case. You will need to provide a list of about ten people to serve as external reviewers for your tenure file. I suggest you make that list now, and make a plan to meet, in person, or over the phone, each of those people between now and the time you go up for tenure.
All of that said, I will make one final recommendation. Meeting with colleagues is important, but can also be time consuming. To make time for regular meetings in my busy schedule, I try to schedule most of my meetings over meals, especially lunch. I take time to eat lunch every day anyway, and having lunch with a colleague can both be enjoyable and a way to fit meetings into your busy schedule. I also schedule meetings right after teaching, as I generally am not very productive on any other fronts right after class. As for phone conversations with colleagues at other institutions, I often schedule those at times when I can talk while taking my afternoon or evening walk.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Ten ways you can write every day
If you've been following the posts this semester on how to have a productive semester, you have already made a plan for the Fall Semester, and blocked out time in your calendar for writing every day.
“Write every day” is fabulous advice. But, how do you actually do it? That was my question for a long time before I finally convinced myself to give it a try. Now that I have been writing every day for four years, I can share with you a few ways to make that possible, and explain to you why I do it.
, he explains the virtues of writing every day. Boice describes a study where new faculty were divided into three groups:
Once I read that, it was clear which group I wanted to be in. I was convinced I should at least try daily writing.
Over time, I came to realize that writing means a lot of things and that there are lots of ways to write every day.
I try to do at least two kinds of writing each day, starting with the blank page in the morning. I am at my best early in the morning. I use those early, fresh moments of the day to free-write and to create new material. Once I run out of steam, I might turn to editing something I have written or to checking references. If I get stuck, I will pull out a mind map and brainstorm ideas.
My routine each weekday, then, is to begin the day with writing or writing-related tasks. On a good day, I can concentrate for two hours. Usually, however, my mind drifts after an hour, so I take a break to check email or have some coffee, and put in another hour after my break. I keep track of the time I have spent working on writing so that I can be proud of my accomplishments, and so that I know when I need to stop.
I know that many academics reject as ridiculous the idea that one could or should write every day. To them, I would gently ask if they have ever tried it. And, I would add that it is not only important to try writing every day, but to commit to trying it for at least a month to see if it works for you. It is also important to have others to whom you are accountable and with whom you can share your struggles.
If you do try writing every day, let me know how it goes! If you are a seasoned daily writer, let me know why you keep it up!
If you have been writing every day this semester, congratulations! If you haven't, ask yourself "why not?" If you need some ideas on how to actually write every day, then this post is for you!
“Write every day” is fabulous advice. But, how do you actually do it? That was my question for a long time before I finally convinced myself to give it a try. Now that I have been writing every day for four years, I can share with you a few ways to make that possible, and explain to you why I do it.
Why you need to write every day
I decided I needed to try to write every day when I found out that scholars who write daily and hold themselves accountable write nearly ten times as much as others! In Robert Boice’s book Advice for New Faculty Members, he explains the virtues of writing every day. Boice describes a study where new faculty were divided into three groups:- The first group did not change their writing habits, and continued to write occasionally in big blocks of time; in one year they wrote an average of 17 pages
- The second group wrote daily and kept a record of their writing; they averaged 64 pages
- The third group wrote daily, kept a daily record, and held themselves accountable to someone weekly; this group's average was 157 pages (Boice 1989:609).
Once I read that, it was clear which group I wanted to be in. I was convinced I should at least try daily writing.
How to write every day
Once I decided I needed to be writing every day, my greatest challenge was to figure out what it meant to write every day. I asked myself, "What counts as daily writing?"Over time, I came to realize that writing means a lot of things and that there are lots of ways to write every day.
Here are ten ways you can write every day:
- Write on a blank page
- Line-edit something you have already written
- Restructure a paper that you have been working on
- Pull together pieces of older documents you have written into a new paper
- Check references and footnotes for accuracy
- Outline or mind-map a new project
- Summarize or take notes on something you have read recently that might be relevant to present or future research projects
- Make a revision plan for a rejected article or a “revise and resubmit”
- Make tables, figures, graphs, or images to represent visually concepts or trends in a paper
- Create an After-the-fact or Reverse Outline
I try to do at least two kinds of writing each day, starting with the blank page in the morning. I am at my best early in the morning. I use those early, fresh moments of the day to free-write and to create new material. Once I run out of steam, I might turn to editing something I have written or to checking references. If I get stuck, I will pull out a mind map and brainstorm ideas.
My routine each weekday, then, is to begin the day with writing or writing-related tasks. On a good day, I can concentrate for two hours. Usually, however, my mind drifts after an hour, so I take a break to check email or have some coffee, and put in another hour after my break. I keep track of the time I have spent working on writing so that I can be proud of my accomplishments, and so that I know when I need to stop.
I know that many academics reject as ridiculous the idea that one could or should write every day. To them, I would gently ask if they have ever tried it. And, I would add that it is not only important to try writing every day, but to commit to trying it for at least a month to see if it works for you. It is also important to have others to whom you are accountable and with whom you can share your struggles.
If you do try writing every day, let me know how it goes! If you are a seasoned daily writer, let me know why you keep it up!
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Schedule your writing into your week
One of the best ways to become a prolific writer is to write every day. If you write every day, you will make progress on your manuscripts, you will become a better writer, and it will become easier for you to write. To ensure that you write every day, however, it is crucial that you schedule it into your calendar.
Yes, I mean, literally, take out your calendar for next week and set aside time for writing every day. I am sure you are a very busy person with many responsibilities. However, if you are reading this blog, then you likely are looking for ways to be more productive. And, one of the best ways to become more productive is to schedule your writing time and treat it just like any other appointment. Here is how.
Schedule writing every day. Take a look at your schedule for next week and figure out when you might have between 15 minutes and two hours to write every day for five days a week. I prefer to work Monday to Friday, and to leave the weekends to spend time with my family. If, however, you absolutely must work on weekends, it still is advisable to write for at least 15 minutes during the week so that, come Saturday afternoon, you do not have to spend all of your writing time re-acquainting yourself with your manuscript. Spending at least 15 minutes a day with your manuscript means that it will always be fresh in your mind.
Schedule at least 15 minutes but no more than two hours. If you think that there is absolutely no way you could make any progress in 15 minutes, I encourage you to try to think of something you could do in 15 minutes. For example, I imagine you could proofread your introduction, free write, update your references, or revise a footnote in 15 minutes. On a previous blog I listed “Seven Ways You Can Write Every Day.” I also suggest that you do not schedule your writing for more than two hours at a time. If you do have a day with no other obligations, it is likely more productive to schedule two hours of writing, followed by two hours of reading than to try to schedule four hours of writing. After reading and writing for four hours, schedule in a long break that involves food and exercise and try to go in for another round. Alternatively, you can take the afternoon off, knowing that you have just had a very productive morning!
Treat writing like any other appointment. This means that, if you have scheduled writing from 8am to 9am on Monday, and someone asks you to meet at that time, that you have to say, “No, I can’t meet at 8am, how about we meet at 9am?” You, after all, will be very busy from 8am to 9am, working on your manuscript. If you are nervous about claiming you are busy when you are “just” writing, keep two things in mind: 1) If you are at a research university, writing is part of your job; and 2) It is quite unlikely that anyone will actually ask you what you are doing when you tell them that you cannot meet at a particular time.
So, go ahead, take out your calendars, and schedule between 15 minutes and two hours of writing into your week next week.
Yes, I mean, literally, take out your calendar for next week and set aside time for writing every day. I am sure you are a very busy person with many responsibilities. However, if you are reading this blog, then you likely are looking for ways to be more productive. And, one of the best ways to become more productive is to schedule your writing time and treat it just like any other appointment. Here is how.
Schedule writing every day. Take a look at your schedule for next week and figure out when you might have between 15 minutes and two hours to write every day for five days a week. I prefer to work Monday to Friday, and to leave the weekends to spend time with my family. If, however, you absolutely must work on weekends, it still is advisable to write for at least 15 minutes during the week so that, come Saturday afternoon, you do not have to spend all of your writing time re-acquainting yourself with your manuscript. Spending at least 15 minutes a day with your manuscript means that it will always be fresh in your mind.
Schedule at least 15 minutes but no more than two hours. If you think that there is absolutely no way you could make any progress in 15 minutes, I encourage you to try to think of something you could do in 15 minutes. For example, I imagine you could proofread your introduction, free write, update your references, or revise a footnote in 15 minutes. On a previous blog I listed “Seven Ways You Can Write Every Day.” I also suggest that you do not schedule your writing for more than two hours at a time. If you do have a day with no other obligations, it is likely more productive to schedule two hours of writing, followed by two hours of reading than to try to schedule four hours of writing. After reading and writing for four hours, schedule in a long break that involves food and exercise and try to go in for another round. Alternatively, you can take the afternoon off, knowing that you have just had a very productive morning!
Treat writing like any other appointment. This means that, if you have scheduled writing from 8am to 9am on Monday, and someone asks you to meet at that time, that you have to say, “No, I can’t meet at 8am, how about we meet at 9am?” You, after all, will be very busy from 8am to 9am, working on your manuscript. If you are nervous about claiming you are busy when you are “just” writing, keep two things in mind: 1) If you are at a research university, writing is part of your job; and 2) It is quite unlikely that anyone will actually ask you what you are doing when you tell them that you cannot meet at a particular time.
So, go ahead, take out your calendars, and schedule between 15 minutes and two hours of writing into your week next week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)