Writing for Publication: Some Guidelines
Dr Neil Moreland
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Writing for Journals - Getting Started
2.01 Decide your angle
2.02 Check out the journals
2.03 Check journal ratings
2.04 Identify your AIM
2.05 Write an abstract first
2.06 Share your work
2.07 Reference properly
1. Introduction
Recently, I had to give a lecture about getting into print - especially in academic journals.
As part of that lecture, I presented a number of guidelines on writing for journals to assist
would be academic writers. As the reception of the guidelines was very positive, I
thought it would be useful to make the guidelines available through this web page.
The audience for the lecture consisted of English university graduates training to be
teachers in Further and Vocational Education and Training (VET). Consequently, whilst
many of the points I make are relevant beyond VET and England, my organising focus is
on publication related to VET journals in the UK.
In addition, I have included some guidelines for those authors who wish to submit book
proposals to publishers for consideration. Many of the items provided under writing for
journals remain relevant, such as checking out the back catalogue and main focus or foci
of a publisher before you submit anything to them, as well as getting used to receiving
rejections!
Receiving rejection slips can be disheartening, but as I make clear in the section entitled:
Become philosophical about publishing any author has to become philosophical about
this and other matters. In the end, it usually is not a matter of life or death - life, for
writing and life goes on!
I hope you find the guidelines useful. Please contact me by email if you have any
comments, questions or useful additions.
2. Writing for Journals
Getting started:
2.01 Decide your angle
The single most important thing you need is a belief that you have something important
or useful to say. In effect, this means having an original angle or approach to something ,
such as:




new or different sample data;
a further confirmation of existing theory/perspective/research;
an extension to existing theory/perspective/research;
a challenge to existing theory/perspective/research.
Decide what your angle is, and make sure that it is highlighted as soon as possible in your
writing.
2.02 Check out the journals
Before you put pen to paper or finger(s) to keyboard, you need to do some research on
journals that you potentially might submit work to. Often, there will be more than one
potential journal. Consequently, you will need to:
 Check out the alternative journals;
 Check out the typical articles they accept (e.g. is it research based?);
 Check out the article submission details (length, to whom etc.);
 Check if editors would be interested in the proposals you have (see writing your article
below); and
 Check average time waits between submission and refereeing of articles, and
publication.
At least after doing this you will know typical articles and possible editors of the
journals!
When you do get round to sending articles off for consideration, editors tend to assume
(quite rightly) that they are the only ones to receive the article. It is extremely bad
manners to send an article to more than one journal at a time. If you do submit to more
than one journal at a time, and are found out, your chances of getting published in that
journal again will go down to zero.
2.03 Check journal ratings
Whilst this does not occur in all countries, there is often a pressure, at least in the UK and
the USA, upon teachers and lecturers to publish articles and books. Publication, however,
is not acceptable in just any journal. There are hierarchies of journals, with some journals
being seen as more prestigious than others and thus as being better to publish in. In the
UK, because of the relationship between research ratings/funding and publications,
journals are often given a rating of 1 to 5, with a rating of 5 being the highest rating (socalled 5 star journals).
Having found out what journals there are in the area that you are concerned with (see
2.02), ask colleagues or make an informed guess as to the rating of the journals. Typically,
the higher the ranking, the more likely the journal is to be double blind refereed
(referees review articles without knowing who the authors are or where they come from)
and to be associated with a prestigious university or organisation/association as well as
have an international focus.
This stage thus involves the identification and use of the pecking order of journals. A
typical ranking order of journals would be:
 double blind refereed international;
 double blind refereed British;
 single blind refereed international;
 single blind refereed British;
 refereed international;
 refereed British;
 other journals (current and more popular - useful for starting and not to be
overlooked!).
Remember, though, that the higher the rating of the journals, the more difficult it is to
place articles with those journals. Consequently, it sometimes is better to start off your
publishing career by getting in the lower star journals first and building up from there.
Alternatively, if you believe that you have something to say, there is no harm in aiming
for the stars!
2.04 Identify your AIM
If you have not already done so, identify your angle - what I call in my recent book
(Kogan Page, 1998) the authors intended message (AIM). If you know what you are
aiming at achieving, (e.g. academic, topical or polemical targets) you will know where to
aim to place the article (see 2.03)
2.05 Write an abstract first
Before writing any article in full, have a go at writing an abstract first. The reason for this
is simple. A good abstract addresses THREE key questions:
 what the topic is and why it is important;
 what the article contains (e.g. this article contains an account of research carried out
to...); and
 what the main finding(s) are with a brief indication of the implications of the finding.
In essence, your abstract, which typically should be no more than 250 words, is a précis
of your article, and can be used to guide the writing of the article itself. The abstract can
always be "tweaked" as well when the article is finished.
A second key factor to remember is the role that an abstract plays for editors of journals.
When editors are deciding to send articles out to be reviewed, they usually read the title
and the abstract in the first instance, leaving the article to be read by the reviewers. By
reading the abstract, an editor will know to which of their reviewers they should send the
article. Additionally, an abstract often colours the judgement of the article itself made by
the editor. If the abstract is poor, a common assumption is that the article is likely to be
poor also.
2.06 Share your work
The rationale for this step should be self-evident. Your sympathetic colleague can be a
surrogate editor, and give useful insights and advice on how the abstract/article reads and
can be improved. It is even better if the colleague is a reviewer or an editor themselves,
and so have real experience of the process. It is important however, to have colleagues
who can be trusted to be honest, helpful and discreet as well as sympathetic. If you have
one, treat them like gold!
It of course may be even more helpful for authors completely new to writing to share the
writing tasks with a colleague. Articles submitted then go under joint authorship. This
approach is especially useful if the colleague has a record of successful writing and
publishing, and thus "knows the ropes".
Whatever you do, it is important to try and critically self-evaluate your work. This is
where reading articles in the journal(s) you wish to submit to becomes useful (see 2.02)
for they will provide useful benchmarks of your quality. Finally, be full but pithy in what
you write. Most journals have word limits and guidelines to authors that must be
followed. Going over word limits increases the chances of non-acceptance dramatically.
2.07 Reference properly
This proposition follows on from the last point, for references are the bane of an editor's
life. References are the single most irritant to an editor and publisher. Editors have to
spend time on this, and tend to look far more favourably on authors and articles which are
error free in this aspect. Remember, when you send articles to editors for consideration, it
is the beginning of getting a reputation (good and bad), and failure to reference
everything fully and properly leads to bad reputations. Consequently, you should make
sure all references are:
 provided in full (including details if they are published in something else such as a
book);
 checked for accuracy (e.g. page numbers are given);
 relevant to the article; and
 add something to the article.
If a reference is not directly referred to in your writing, omit it!
Typically, back copies of journals will have a specification for authors somewhere within
them. Buy the journal, or send for an inspection copy, or alternatively take a photocopy
of the guidelines, and use them to structure, reference and present your article. A typical
referencing system used is the Harvard system (developed at the University) whilst many
journals now have guidelines also on electronic referencing. Make sure you use whatever
guidelines are given. If in doubt, contact the editor.