Peer Support of a Faculty "Writers' Circle" Increases Confidence and Productivity in Generating Scholarship

被引:24
作者
Brandon, Catherine [1 ]
Jamadar, David [1 ]
Girish, Gandikota [1 ]
Dong, Qian [1 ]
Morag, Yoav [1 ]
Mullan, Patricia [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Med Educ, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
Writing group; faculty peer support; academic productivity; scholarly writing; scholarly motivation; SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY; MEDICAL-EDUCATION; MANUSCRIPTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.006
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Rationale and Objectives: Publishing is critical for academic medicine career advancement. Rejection of manuscripts can be demoralizing. Obstacles faced by clinical faculty may include lack of time, confidence, and optimal writing practices. This study describes the development and evaluation of a peer-writing group, informed by theory and research on faculty development and writing. Materials and Methods: Five clinical-track radiology faculty members formed a "Writers' Circle" to promote scholarly productivity and reflection on writing practices. Members decided to work with previously rejected manuscripts. After members' initial meeting, interactions were informal, face to face during clinical work, and online. After the first 6 months, an anonymous survey asked members about the status of articles and evaluations of the writing group. Results: Ten previously rejected articles, at least one from each member, were submitted to the Circle. In 6 months, four manuscripts were accepted for publication, five were in active revision, and one was withdrawn. All participants (100%) characterized the program as worth their time, increasing their motivation to write, their opportunities to support scholarly productivity of colleagues, and their confidence in generating scholarship. Conclusions: Peer-support writing groups can facilitate the pooling of expertise and the exchange of recommended writing practices. Our peer-support group increased scholarly productivity and provided a collegial approach to academic writing.
引用
收藏
页码:534 / 538
页数:5
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   WHY ACADEMICIANS DONT WRITE [J].
BOICE, R ;
JONES, F .
JOURNAL OF HIGHER EDUCATION, 1984, 55 (05) :567-582
[2]   Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports [J].
Bordage, G .
ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2001, 76 (09) :889-896
[3]   Scientific English: A Program for Addressing Linguistic Barriers of International Research Trainees in the United States [J].
Cameron, Carrie ;
Chang, Shine ;
Pagel, Walter .
JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION, 2011, 26 (01) :72-78
[4]  
Camp Mark, 2013, J Bone Joint Surg Am, V95, pe44, DOI 10.2106/JBJS.L.00519
[5]   Enhancing the mission of academic surgery by promoting scientific writing skills [J].
Derish, Pamela A. ;
Maa, John ;
Ascher, Nancy L. ;
Harris, Hobart W. .
JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2007, 140 (02) :177-183
[6]  
Edwards Karen, 2002, Acad Med, V77, P939
[7]   Reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to AJR by international authors [J].
Ehara, Shigeru ;
Takahashi, Kei .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2007, 188 (02) :W113-W116
[8]   Impact of fellowship training on research productivity in academic otolaryngology [J].
Eloy, Jean Anderson ;
Svider, Peter F. ;
Mauro, Kevin M. ;
Setzen, Michael ;
Baredes, Soly .
LARYNGOSCOPE, 2012, 122 (12) :2690-2694
[9]   The reviewer is always right: peer review of research in Medical Education [J].
Eva, Kevin W. .
MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2009, 43 (01) :2-4
[10]  
Ferrer RL, 2002, FAM MED, V34, P455