Reflection Paper

Reflections on Trying to Publish forthe First Time

Derek Herbert
Kanda University of International Studies
The workshop session “Advice for Authors: Raising Your Chances of Getting
Published” was presented by Melodie Cook at the 2018 College and University
Educator Special Interest Group Conference. This workshop offered English
language teaching professionals a chance to review their knowledge on therequirements of publishing an article. It also gave those professionals who have
not yet published an insight into the process and the dos and don’ts on trying toget published. The presentation specifically focused on getting published with
JALT Journal where Cook has a role on the editorial board. Few authors areaccepted for publication in JALT Journal with editors expecting articles of thehighest quality. The presentation gave sound advice to session attendees on how
the publication process should be carried out correctly to raise their chances ofbeing one of those few authors who do get their article accepted with the journal.
Cook’s presentation opened with the question “Why did you choose toattend this workshop?” This question allowed the participants to discuss witheach other why they were attending and to reflect over their current teaching
and/or research contexts. My reason to attend was that I had recently finished amaster’s degree in TESOL a few months before this workshop, and I was looking
to start publishing soon. My master’s program did not include any writing for
publication instruction; thus, the presentation looked to be able to provide mewith useful advice to start the process.
“What to do” and “what not to do” to publish a paper were then presented.
Cook highly recommended participants to follow the submission guidelines200Trying to Publish for the First Time, OCJSI 1, pages 200-204

involving word limits and prerequisites before sending the article.
Further advice which I found interesting was the careful consideration andselection of the journal one should choose to submit a paper. The research areaof the submitted paper should be in line with a journal’s key submission topics,
so a paper will then relate and appeal to the readers of the journal. For example;
JALT Journal includes key topics such as cross-cultural studies, classroom-based
research, and language learning and acquisition. After further deliberation on
this, I wanted to compare the quality of my MA dissertation with JALT Journal
articles that relate to the topic that I focused on. I feel that all JALT publications
use a much higher standard of academic writing, and I have noticed that authorsof those articles seem more experienced in writing for publication because they
have built up their skills over time. Maybe these authors do not work alone whenwriting and perhaps have mentors or collaborators to proofread and advise. I
myself do not have much guidance, but if I did, I feel it would likely increase myopportunity to write articles of higher quality. With that said, I find myself withincreased determination to seek out further support to improve my chances topublish with the journal in the future.
“Scattergun” and “salami-slicing” were terms that Cook included in thepresentation of approaches that writers should avoid when trying to getpublished. I had not previously come across these points and agreed that boththese approaches should be avoided, and I will briefly explain them now. The
scattergun approach, to submit a paper to many different journals, would likelycause a writer to become unnecessarily overworked due to journals having
different kinds of prerequisites for a publication. From a journal editors’perspective, it is unprofessional if a writer submits the same paper to otherjournals. Salami-slicing is dividing a larger study into smaller articles, and such
submissions face a likely rejection due to insufficient detail and quality. I believe
the detail is seemingly a quick fix with comments from the editor on what islacking, but I think the quality is a key issue of which the author should be aware,salami type or not. I was not familiar with the term salami-slicing, but I haveexperienced advice from people saying that I should divide my MA dissertation
into smaller articles, re-work them, and then submit for publication. The concern
201

Herbert

is exactly what I previously stated: I believe my articles may get rejected due toinsufficient length and/or quality. I have a clearer perspective on the issues thatI would face if I were to submit parts of my dissertation, but collaborating withexperienced authors could be one solution to help combat the challenges.
Cook then presented the characteristics of inadequate articles. We saw an
example of a poorly designed fictitious article, and after evaluating it and fromthe points presented by Cook, it was obvious an article must be clear, give
supportive information, and provide up-to-date references. One point that Cookhighlighted that related to my academic writing experience in the MA TESOL
program was the habit of making strong assertions instead of hedging if there isno evidence to back up those assertions. After the conference, I decided to reread
all my MA assignments. I found a strong assertion in one paper that should havebeen hedged, and in another assignment I found some new information in theconclusion. I also found that language that I used within the papers was fairly
simplistic compared to a JALT Journal article, where more variation of academic
vocabulary was used. I was pleased with the outcome of both papers; however,
if I would have considered points raised by Cook, I believe I may have written
better papers with more clarity. This workshop could have therefore made apositive impact towards my masters.
When Cook presented the qualities of a good article next, they seemed to be
obvious things perhaps most researchers would include in articles anyway. Forexample, the abstract should be brief but have a clear explanation of the purpose,
methodology, and outcomes – things I learnt in my MA, but some authors may
forget to incorporate. One further point that particularly struck me was that thewriter must persuade readers for a need for the paper.
Cook also mentioned that American Psychological Association (APA) styleis key when writing articles for JALT Journal. I do not own an APA manualand feel uncertain on various points such as the switch from Harvard to APA
referencing. My master’s program and education courses before that did not
follow APA style, but all followed a Harvard referencing style which I feel has
been ingrained in me.
The presentation moved on to the process of getting published. Cook202

Trying to Publish for the First Time, OCJSI 1, pages 200-204

described how long and how potentially challenging the entire publishingprocess can be. Authors who have submitted a paper to journals are anxious as
they await a response, and every journal has its own publishing timeframe. The
publishing process for JALT Journal can take around nine months to finalise,hence it is important for writers to think carefully about this time frame. One
point Cook expressed was one should not wait for editors or reviewers to getback to them with feedback; they should move on to other research. Authors do
not have control over the publishing process and, if their article is rejected, they
can consider submitting elsewhere.
Another key aspect in manuscript preparation that Cook mentioned wasthat the first draft is not necessarily the draft that an author will send to thepublisher. From writing my MA program papers, much work still had to be done
after the first draft, such as proofreading, receiving feedback from my tutor, thenfurther research, editing, and proofreading. It was not a “write once and done”
process. Much time must go into refining the article to meet the requirementsof a journal. I believe receiving a second opinion of one’s article is instructive.
From my experience in getting my articles polished, it was beneficial to haveanother person proofread a paper with feedback, as we may not always see all
errors ourselves. Although, after deeper thought, it may have been beneficial tohave gotten further opinions on my past academic papers to check on certain
areas that I still find challenging, namely clarity and punctuation, as they may
have improved the final grade.
After attending the workshop, I wrote a list of key considerations toremember when writing papers which may give me a better chance of getting
accepted for publication. Since the workshop, I have also shared these points
with students in my academic writing classes to increase their awareness of thekey elements in order to foster their own academic writing skills. They took
to these positively with proofreading being the most interesting. I created anactivity where learners proofread their partner’s pre-made academic article
using pre-taught error correction codes, so learners could later improve thepaper. It proved a very enjoyable task for them to understand the importance ofproofreading.
203

Herbert

Author bio

Derek Herbert is an English lecturer at Kanda University of International Studies
where he presently teaches EFL to university learners. His interests include learner
L2 motivation, reflective practice and teacher development. herbert-d@kanda.kuis.
ac.jp
Received: October 27, 2018
Accepted: October 18, 2019204