LPhD120 The Art of Scientific Writing (generic course)

Ansvarligt institutSkov & Landskab

ForskeruddannelsesprogramForest, Landscape and Planning (REFOLANA)

The course is open for all
KursusdatoerThe course consists of 4-5 ½-day (Friday afternoon) workhops with in-between homework. Usually offered over 2-3 months each spring and sometimes fall.
Kursus resuméThe course aims to enhance the capability of participants to write good scientific papers, and to increase their productivity. Through a series of lectures, workshops and in-class peer reviews the participants work on and improve a paper of their own. In addition, discussions on co-authoring issues, team work, handling review reports etc are discussed and best practices pointed out.
Kursus hjemmesidehttp://en.sl.life.ku.dk/omskovoglandskab/medarbejd...
KursustilmeldingThe course and workshops days is usually announced 4-6 weeks prior to start. Enrol with Charlotte Bukdahl Jakobsen at cja@life.ku.dk or Bo Jellesmark Thorsen at bjt@life.ku.dk
Deadline for tilmeldingThree days prior to the first workshop
Pointværdi3 (ECTS)
Begrænset deltagerantalThere's a max of 40 students
Workshop Day 1: Getting started.
We introduce and discuss the issues of i) getting started, ii) finding relevant journals and selecting the right one, iii) organising your work for productivity and impact, iv) team-work in scientific writing.
Introduction to the IFR guidelines. Go through 'Initial planning' step. Exercise in small groups and summarise. Go through 'Producing the Outline' step and define homework - supervisors to be involved.

Workshop Day 2: Working over the outline
Re-iteration of 'Producing the Outline'. Brief presentations of progress by participants. Further work in groups on the steps of the outline - giving and receiving critique, comments and suggestions. Go through 'Producing the manuscript' carefully - describe how the work develops as a continuous refinement of structure. Define homework: Start the work on the body of the paper for next time. Involve supervisors.

Workshop Day 3: Building the paper block by block
Re-iterate 'Producing the manuscript'. Discuss experiences as we go along - take down as notes. Further work in groups on the actual building of the paper - giving and receiving critique, comments and suggestions. Define homework: Continue the work on the body of the paper for next time. Involve supervisors. Not an aim to be finished for final workshop - just well on the way.

Workshop Day 4: Finishing touches and handling the review process
Brief presentations by participants of progress in building the paper and plans from now on. Go through 'Finishing touches'-'The refereeing and publishing process'. Stress the need not to rush the final phase, but also the need to finish. Present structure and tricks of good referee-response reports. Stress the need to do a good job there. Make plans for the future..
Participants: Ph.D.-students and other faculty members. There is a limit of 20 participants. Each participant brings: - a paper to work on during the course - could be in any process stage prior to sub-mission - commitment from a supervisor (for PhD-students) or colleague (faculty members) to read and participate in at least the activities between workshop days - writing paper, pens, preferably a laptop. The course is arranged as a series of workshops with in-between work on the paper that each participant brings to the course. In addition, each participant and associated supervisor should expect to read and comment on 1-2 papers of other participants. The workshops largely follow a structure designed along the steps of producing a paper, as outlined in the IFR-guideline. Except for the first, each workshop is initiated with an open discussion based on the topics of the 'homework'. Following that the main points of the IFR-text are presented, complemented by additional points that come up in the discussions. This forms the basis for the group exercises of the day. Each workshop is concluded with a wrap-up of the exercise and an outline of the between-workshop work to do, i.e. the 'homework'. Note that the success of the course hinges crucially on participants showing up, having worked on their own paper as agreed and prepared comments on the work of others as agreed. Indeed the course merely provides a structured setting for learning from others and getting experience. The first workshop is a bit different as it also introduces the issues of i) getting started , ii) finding relevant journals and selecting the right one , iii) organising your work for productivity and impact , iv) team-work in scientific writing . Duration: Each workshop lasts about 2-3 hours (13-15/16) and there are 4 workshops over 6-8 weeks. In between, work is to be expected, but it will mostly be an integral part of own research and writing.
The course aims to enhance the capability of participants to write good scientific papers. This concerns the quality of writing and disseminating in order to improve readability, maximise the contribution of the research done and improve the opportunities for publishing. It also concerns the quantity of scientific production by initially addressing the question of increasing productivity through peer-guidance, best-practice in organisation of work, co-operation, choice of partners/co-authors and group-dynamics in scientific writing.
IFR's Online guide to scientific writing. PhD-supervision Guidelines 2nd ed. (Div 5). Slides made available during the course. Scientific literature relevant for the attendant Additional references for more indebt studies will be provided during the course, but not be used as a basis for the course
Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, bjt@life.ku.dk, Skov & Landskab/Afd. for Økonomi, Politik og Driftsplanlægning, Tlf: 353-31700
Andre forlæsere
Professor Cecil C. Konijnendijk
Kursus omkostninger
To have 3 ECTS-credits awarded you must hand in your the abstract and outline resulting from the workshops and exercises. At the latest 2 weeks after the final workshop day, you hand in the paper you have been working on. Credits are awarded if the course responsible finds that it shows acceptable progress.