Introduction to Graduate Research (Fall 2023)/Week 7: Difference between revisions
From CommunityData
(→Agenda) |
(→Agenda) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* Intro to the challenge (5 min) | * Intro to the challenge (5 min) | ||
* Writing activity/discussion ( | * Writing activity/discussion (20 min) | ||
::'''Prompt:''' ''Reflect on the process you followed to develop the final project abstract you submitted for the class this week. Please try, with as much accuracy as possible/reasonable, to identify/list key steps or stages in the process by which you developed and completed this document.'' | ::'''Prompt:''' ''Reflect on the process you followed to develop the final project abstract you submitted for the class this week. Please try, with as much accuracy as possible/reasonable, to identify/list key steps or stages in the process by which you developed and completed this document.'' | ||
* Publishing ( | * Publishing (20 min) | ||
** Explore/discuss Aaron's | ** Explore/discuss Aaron's three crude process diagrams ([https://chi2024.acm.org/ CHI]; [https://academic.oup.com/JOC ''Journal of Communication'']; [https://www.science.org/journal/sciadv ''Science Advances'']) | ||
* | * Peer reviewing (35 min) | ||
** | ** Peer review discussion provocations (three key themes below) | ||
*** The structure/incentives of peer review | |||
*** Being an effective, generous, responsible reviewer | |||
*** Navigating tricky, low quality, and/or misguided reviews | |||
=== Break! === | === Break! === | ||
Latest revision as of 20:52, 1 November 2023
Agenda[edit]
Part 1. How do you communicate your work? Writing, publishing, and reviewing[edit]
- Intro to the challenge (5 min)
- Writing activity/discussion (20 min)
- Prompt: Reflect on the process you followed to develop the final project abstract you submitted for the class this week. Please try, with as much accuracy as possible/reasonable, to identify/list key steps or stages in the process by which you developed and completed this document.
- Publishing (20 min)
- Explore/discuss Aaron's three crude process diagrams (CHI; Journal of Communication; Science Advances)
- Peer reviewing (35 min)
- Peer review discussion provocations (three key themes below)
- The structure/incentives of peer review
- Being an effective, generous, responsible reviewer
- Navigating tricky, low quality, and/or misguided reviews
- Peer review discussion provocations (three key themes below)
Break![edit]
Part 2. Guests[edit]
- Larissa Buchholz and Jim Schwoch
