The Process of Article Writing - Essay Example

Qualitative Critical Review Name University School Course Date 1. Article writing process: What worked well? The process of writing my article was very educative and greatly harnessed my research as well as writing skills. I was able to develop my idea from a very basic level and grow it to a highly acceptable standard with the support of the supervisor and the student reviewer. The process allowed me to gain a deeper understanding of the study subject by consulting experts as well as published journal articles. Consequently, I developed an article based on available evidence by applying established scientific approaches that I managed to understand more during the article writing process (Alebaikan & Troudi, 2010; Blaxter, 2010). One of the most remarkable aspects of the concluded writing process was the continuous appraisal and the timely feedback that immensely contributed to a highly organized and quality article. Working closely with my supervisor in ensuring that my article adhered to the set writing standards proved to be extremely useful in ensuring I delivered a high quality article. What did not work well? On the other hand, the short time frame during which I was to deliver the completed article curtailed the writing process. In my view, there is need to extend the process over a considerable period of time that will allow for the necessary consultations and effective learning of the required skills. In addition, there were no adequate subject experts to critique the evidence used in support of my study hypotheses that yielded my article. What would I do differently? I would explore available avenues to generate a wider consultation with experts on the accuracy of the evidence used to support my findings. In addition, I would also subject my article to more critical reviews and work towards having a harmonised view of both the subject and methodology experts. Furthermore, I would strive to generate sufficient evidence and support the hypothesis behind my study as well as the findings. How can my academic writing be improved? My academic writing can be improved through repeated practice exercises on a broad spectrum of topics. This will expose me to the different writing styles applicable to a wide range of articles. In addition, I require additional mentorship support while writing articles in future so that I may bridge the gaps evident in my writing skills as demonstrated by this process. Finally, I need to continue improving my knowledge on writing a standard article that meets the set standards. I can also gain more knowledge and skills by participating in writing conferences organized by a wide range of subject experts (Bryman, 2015). 2. The conference approach to writing: What worked well? The individualized conferences that I attended greatly enhanced what I previously learnt in the classroom set up. I am positive that this one-on-one strategy greatly harnessed my writing skills by enabling me to realize the gaps in my strategies for developing a standard academic paper. Through the writing conferences, I finally unlocked my potential as a top writer with a greater understanding of effective writing approaches. Particularly, I was able to gain a deeper understanding following the individualized teaching, clarity of instructions, and introspective questioning. Moreover, I received feedback promptly coupled with suggestions on how I could make my writing better as a progressed (Burns, 2012). In fact, I was able to have a deep analysis of my writing while also reviewing its quality using the knowledge gained through conference writing thus remarkably improving its quality. The structured approach adopted during the concluded writing sessions yielded better results as evidenced by the quality of my final article. In my observation, I noted that the writing process focussed on specific points and identified model solutions to my writing weaknesses. I was greatly encouraged to explore and apply relevant vocabulary in the course of my writing. Finally, the conference approach to writing was very exciting and helped me to gain further interest in writing academic articles. What did not work well? On the other hand, I feel the conference writing approach consumed plenty of time before finally realizing its objectives. In addition, the processes had direct external influence thus limiting me within the confines of the understanding of my supervisor and reviewer. I think that the approach makes it difficult for the writer to present an idea in its original form due to the numerous inputs and suggestions from the reviewing teams. What would I do differently? Considering my experiences during the concluded writing process, given a second chance I would increase my level of engagement with the writing conference teams in order to gain superior writing prowess. Individualized interactions through the conferences enabled me to have a look at my writing from another person’s perspective and rate its quality. This is important because in most instances, I only writing basing on my individual perspective and skills which can be wrong. I will also consult more throughout the writing process and gain the best of the invaluable writing approach. How can I improve my engagement with others? I can improve my engagement with others by establishing and exploring common areas of interest. In addition, while interacting with others, I should be ready to provide them with candid opinions regarding the areas that they need to improve in a friendly and reasonable way. Moreover, I should be able to assist them in addressing the areas they identify as requiring help 3. The experiences of reviewing: What worked well? The review process is an exercise that remarkably improved my skills in academic writing. During this process, I was able to apply my learned skills and understanding in writing by identifying some of the common problems that contribute to a poor article. I also gained additional knowledge while providing feedback to the writer by applying the knowledge I have acquired in the past. Most importantly, I was able to harness my critical thinking skills that will enable me to consider a reviewer’s perspective in the course of my future writing. In addition, the review by both the supervisor and the student was a great positive in the course of the exercise to promote accuracy as one develops the skills essential for conducting an academic review. What did not work well? The article review did not rely on an individual’s area of interest or expertise but was done randomly. This may compromise the quality of review findings especially if I have no information regarding the subject under review as well as the scope of the article. In addition, there was limited time allocation during the review process thus potentially jeopardizing the quality of the review findings depending on one’s capacity and the need to consult further in case there is a poor understanding study area. In addition, there was no sufficient time to consult with the writer on some of the sections of the article that I did not understand. What would I do differently? I would work closely with the writer in ensuring I understand all the sections that are unclear or ambiguous. In addition, I would extensively consult with subject experts to establish the accuracy of the writer’s arguments and ensure they are consistent with available evidence especially when I lack deep understanding of the study subject. How can I improve as a reviewer? In order to improve as a reviewer, I think that going through several reviewed articles will be essential. In addition, I need to benefit from additional mentorship from the renowned reviewers of written articles and master the skill. I could also review the previously reviewed articles and compare my findings with the reviewers’ reports. Finally, I must enhance my understanding of the expectations on the different categories of written articles. This will enable me to know the structure and guiding standards for written articles. 4. The experience of being reviewed: What worked well? Being reviewed and appraised by both the supervisor and the student provided me with a better understanding of my writing skills. I was able to ascertain the areas that I really to pay attention to while undertaking writing exercises based on different perspectives. In fact, the review process was a great enlightenment to me by pointing out some of the glaring mistakes that I make while writing an article. There are some aspects of my writing that I assumed in the past but clearly require to be worked upon. I was consciously awakened to these shortcomings as well as the need to start working on them. The review process enabled me develop an action plan to address the shortcomings identified by the reviewers within the shortest time possible. The most interesting aspect of the review was when I got the opportunity to give my response to the reviewer based on his/her review comments. What did not work well? The timeframe for the review was very short and did not allow for repeated feedback sessions that would otherwise help to build consensus between the writer and reviewers. The review findings were provided in a written report which denied the reviewer and the writer an opportunity to clarify the written findings through face-to-face discussions. References Alebaikan, R., & Troudi, S. (2010). Blended learning in Saudi universities: challenges and perspectives. Research in Learning Technology, 18(1). Retrieved from http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/viewFile/10750/12370 Blaxter, L. (2010). How to research. McGraw-Hill Education (UK). Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-fVEBgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=research+question:+2010&ots=cmT7Sz5XBb&sig=N755A6U1CrOMab8zjGRF5ZcNYmQ Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. Oxford university press. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=N2zQCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=research+methods+2015&ots=dnOtCRJ4qg&sig=0C8HGMvRTseZklf-MeLEQzxtg4w Burns, H. (2012). Visualizing social science research. Maps, methods, and meaning. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35(3), 328–329.  Read More