Publishing Your Work for Research and Practitioner

Audiences

Rose Zbiek & Glen Blume

Penn State University

16 May 2008

PAMTE

Writing a Great Paper

Do I have something worth writing about?

• Write about what you know.• Find out what’s out there.• Identify an audience.

• Be clear about “what is new” here for this audience.

What makes a paper good enough to publish?

• Make a point.• Make a point rather than tell what you're

doing/did.• Strong and concise examples illustrate

your point and provide the necessary background (e.g., what GSP can do).

• Make sure the figures/tables/graphics are needed and clear.

I’m not a really good writer. What can I do?

• Proofread and spell check.

• Check flow of paper and tone.

• Have others read it before submission.

• Perhaps try a presentation first to float the ideas and refine the message.

How might we organize to jointly write an article?

• Discuss the idea first--brainstorm the message.

• Divide and conquer--use the talents.

• Keep on task and topic.

• Check for “written by committee” feel.

• Decide authorship (who and order).

Identifying a Venue

How do I decide where to submit it?

• One project/idea could go many ways.

• Find out what fits the publication before you start.

• Read the publication before you submit (or start write).

• Watch for focus issues/themes.

How do I make a case for where I publish?

• Review process (e.g., double blind)• Authors of pieces (e.g.,national)• Acceptance rate (e.g., ≈60%)• Audience (e.g., resource for teachers, peers)• Circulation (e.g., 1400-2300)• Reviews (e.g., PCTM yearbook in MT)• External reviewers• Personal statement

Acceptance

Local

State

National

International

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 1 2 3 4 5

Practitioner Venues

I know about PCTM but are there other places?

• “Local” review: PCTM magazine, MAA section newsletter

• State+: PCTM yearbook and other state pubs (e.g., PASCD, The New York State Mathematics Teachers Journal)

• National: NCTM journals, NCTM yearbook, AMTE monograph, CITE

We do this great activity. How can we publish it?

• Be sure it’s not “commonplace.”

• Know it can be “done” in other places in a reasonable way.

• Double check for good mathematics and pedagogy.

• Be clear about goal of activity – articulate learning goal beyond fun.

Do I need student work or handouts?

Maybe not but …• Absence of student work in appropriate

places might imply no one ever tried it in the classroom.

• Convey that it is applicable for classroom.

• Avoid seeming clueless about the “real” classroom world.

What are pitfalls of a paper about our classes?

• Doesn’t share the insights and decisions, rationale and reflection – how are we doing this and why are we doing it this way

• Not enough detail (e.g., “we followed this up with a worksheet”)

• Worksheet/tasks given but no sense of whole-class discussion or how the work was “pulled together”

• Details of a classroom that are not related to the lesson

What do we probably not need to say?

• Assumes reader needs remediation

• Talking at or down to teachers

Researcher Venues

What do I need in a research ms?

• Make sure all the parts are there and they fit together– Question– Framework– Participants– Data: sources, collection, analysis– Results, discussion

• Various journals (e.g., JMTE, MTL, ESJ)

What’s a theoretical framework?

• Not simply a literature review

• Influences all parts of study (e.g., data analysis)

• Explains a phenomenon

• Positions the study in the broader field

I have data from my class. Do I write about it?

• Research questions are field matters and not only local matters (e.g., how well does our tutoring by prospective teachers work)

• Study isn’t done because we can collect data

What’s a research question?

• Research questions are researchable questions (e.g., What’s the better way to teach ELL students mathematics?)

• “So what” is not answered (e.g., we know that students do this but how is that important)

• “Nobody did this before” or “fill a gap in the literature” doesn’t cut it.

What kind of papers don’t fly?

• Comparing vague alternatives (e.g., technology versus no technology, reform curricula versus traditional)

• Deficit studies (e.g., evidence that teachers don’t know, can’t do anything well enough)

What goes into a good literature review?

• Not a single focus or lack of grounding in the literature and no awareness of other work

• Lit review is more than a laundry list• Lit review doesn’t need everything ever read• Connections to all parts (e.g., instruments,

conclusions) to the literature

How much detail do we include about the data?

• Psychometric properties are needed• Justify why the data are good

Note: Can’t make a case for instruments that do not match research question constructs (e.g., Teacher knowledge of function measured by PRAXIS II content exam)

What do we say about our data analysis?

• Thoughtful data analysis without a “trust me” attitude

• Evidence of looking for disconfirming evidence in qualitative studies

• Analysis of data rather than description of data

What’s a pitfall for a quantitative study?

• No attention to the unit of analysis

• Writing about statistical tests as if writing/copying a textbook

• Calling things “significant” or “different” when the stats don’t support the claim

What goes in a discussion/conclusion?

• Claims given as findings are supported by the data.

• Conclusions/implications that are not a leap of faith from the empirical work.

How can I tick off a reviewer or editor?

• Annoying the reviewer with sloppiness, poor writing (have someone else read it)

• Submit a math proof or lesson plan for research

• Miss purpose of abstract or key words• Have a good idea or good paper and

not submit it