Table of Contents
The importance of feedback throughout my college career has been beneficial with increasing my knowledge of how to write particular types of papers. In the course of these past five years with Northcentral University (NCU), I have found the practice of writing papers every weekend assisted tremendously on the detailed way of utilizing the simplicity of words and not using the fluff to make the paper longer. As a government civilian, we have our own published writing formats, but the similarities of both formats use bottom line up front (BLUF) and making sure getting the point across as simple and as quickly as possible. My receipts upon my writing are similar with the focus of understanding the material.
My weakest point I need to work on is the clarity of my work. My fear of not being able to sound like a scholarly writer trumps my writing skills. I have recently received information on clarity, and my professor explained to just keep it simple and get the point across. It was explained, sometimes that is the best way to write even if the rest of the analysis may not be simple. I do feel like this was one of the most invigorating analysis a professor has given me. Receiving and Responding to Feedback Receiving constructive criticism analyses the writing and not the writer, which can boost my innovative writing techniques.
The writing process involves feedback from important stakeholders of the project (i.e. a class professor, advisor, a dissertation chair or a personal mentor) (University of Oregon, n.d.). The response to feedback is to either ask questions about the clarity of the process. The understanding of the feedback would be clear to follow if the right questions are asked. Following the process of the paper, and providing drafts will help the person writing the feedback could initiate a better thought process I am trying to accomplish. The importance in the receivement of the feedback is part of the writing process, in which is shown to hinder the success completion of research degrees (Caffarella, & Barnett, 2000).
127 our experts are availableright now
Although, it was stated in a study that sending the drafts to multiple stakeholders could help with different views of the paper (Caffarella, & Barnett, 2000). This same study also mentions to pay attention to the possibility of confliction with the feedback from multiple people. Personally, I have received conflicting feedback and I have found that researching both cases can give me a better perspective of both sides and I can make a scholarly decision. To help the students increase their sense of investment when connecting and collaborating effectively, there are key strategies of peer review according to the article by Washington University in St. Louis, 2018, identifying and teaching the skills required for peer review, the teaching of peer review essentials within the writing process, describing the peer review as an opportunity to learn how to review their own constructive feedback, and defining the role of the peer review reader not as the evaluator.
My Understanding of Scholarly Writing One main practice I have been trying to keep up with since have started this doctoral program, organization. Understanding this is a critical part of scholarly writing, this practice can help with the rest of the areas needed to meet the standards. Content, organization, grammar, and style are important to pay attention to when detailing and cleaning up drafts or feedbacks. Mindfire Press (2018) examined each area to define what is needed in scholarly writing. Content is a reflection of critical thinking to assist is analyzing skills of synthesis and evaluation.
Organization is a long arm of the content, the content is constructed in order of necessity for the paper to have smooth transitions, introductions or conclusions, headings, and overall structure for the uniformed reader (Mindfire Press, 2018). The grammar is another long arm from the content, which tells the story being told. Grammar is important to provide correct information with citations, words that have the correct meaning, and usage of proper grammar. The style is important for scholarly writing, although the different uses are within different fields of study. Currently, my doctorate degree is dependent upon the use of American Psychological Association (APA) style.
In the past 5 years, these sets of guidelines are important for me to understand, and I am thankful that I do perceive the commonalities feedback of clarity to be revised. Formatting with APA can help express opinions and helps discuss without using a passive voice. Practice can assist in many ways to help write and implement different suggestions of feedback to construct a paper. Using this standard practice, it can assist me with future submissions to journals, which most credible scientific journals use this practice as part of their determination of credibly and quality of work researchers submit (Kelly et. al., 2014).
Benefits of Feedback and Peer Review
The benefits of using feedback and peer reviews:
- by learning how to read carefully with attention to the details of their own or another writer;
- learning how to strengthen the writing by taking into account the responses of interested readers or subject matter experts;
- assists in making a transition from writing to specific to broader audiences;
- learn how to prepare and communicate the constructive feedback with peers work; and
- understand how to collect and reply to feedback on their own work (Washington University in St. Louis, 2018).
Peer reviews also support and maintains integrity and authenticity of the writers data (Kelly et. al., 2014). The replies given from peers are another way to ameliorate for a more comprehensive description the peers could understand. Vague or very general responses may give the impression of a rushed paper. Responding to another peer could be uncomfortable due to the possibility of the response taken offensively or not correctly written. I have noticed some reasons used by the Washington University in St. Louis (2018) article, I am guilty of.
Clear guidance from the professor is needed on how to utilize the comments or responses from feedback. If the responses are very general, it will make it difficult for the feedback to be taken into consideration or to understand. The level of experience is needed from the person commenting on a paper to help them understand what is needed to changed and what the person will need to know to implement. Another part of feedback that may be relevant is the process of writing a paper for a course. The understanding of the peer to peer review should be taken into consideration, but the students’ comprehension of those comments will count just as much as the professors’ review. Since peer reviewers are like referees, this allows the editors to ensure that peer reviewers are fairly conducted and effective in a timely manner (Kelly et. al., 2014).
Conclusion
Scholarly writing is a process that may have to be drawn multiple times through different people in academia. Although, there are findings of unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, or personal views are published prior to showing the review to the writer, this is a learning opportunity for peer to peer reviews to be taught in depth in a school setting or practiced with every paper necessary for a doctorate or starting at a college level Peer review is intended to improve the quality of the paper written by a novice or a master at any level course manuscripts.
Practice seems to be the end result of understanding how the formats work, but the there are steps to this process that can override just the formats as explained earlier in this paper. Overall, the main idea of a reviewer is to assist heir peers in conducting the reviews due to many reasons. A few reasons reviewers do this is due to their feeling of it being an academic duty to perform, they do not get paid, and many times the writers know researchers of respectable subject areas and would like their perspective of information given, and it also provides them some popularity with their community (Kelly et. al., 2014).
The understanding of criteria needed for the reviewer to learn and perfect this process is ongoing with every time they are writing their notes for reviews. When the reviewer has completed the reading and determining factors by going through the processes, it is part of the journals research publications team to determine the publication. I have also learned that there is that particular process to peer review properly in order to gain respect and not downgrade the writer with the keynotes from this paper. There is more to it than the actual writing of the review.
Being an expert on the subject the reviewer should be a professional about the review and put work into it, be pleasant with evaluation wording, read the invite of the requests the writer is giving the reviewer, be helpful to guide the writer on where to navigate on what needs work, be timely and realistic with what has been requested of the writer, be open to the writers questions and possible disagreements on the edits, and most importantly be organized for the following of the information or edits of changes or suggestions could be followed fluidly (Kelly et. al., 2014).
