Thread by @LusaNetto2

Main takeaways of todays session of the #iconswritingschool. @efieldingd ; @stefano_osella ;@SRanchordas ;@amalsethi;@anna_pirri_

Main takeaways from @efieldingd
1) It goes beyond structure, it has to do with the story you want to tell, build your story arc and use a reader empathic perspective.
2) Find your trusteed readers, let them discuss your argument.
Let's unpack these lessons, follow the thread!

II- Ask yourself what story do you want to tell, to whom and why? Think of yourself as a teacher who wants to explain something to someone, who wants to be understood and to have his/her work used.
@efieldingd, @ICON__S , #iconswritingschool

III- There is no one size fits all, figure out what works for you, your career stage, your subject, our goals. There are multiples ways of writing a good article and it is indeed a permanent process.
@efieldingd ; @ICON__S , #iconswritingschool

IV- Knowing this, set your publishing agenda: research your journal target, sketch a story arc, work on your literature review and your argument, address policy proposals, take the hard look back.

V-What do want to tell? Sketch a story arc and reflect upon it. Does it make sense? Use a readers empathic perspective. Think of the writer as a teacher explaning something to someone; you might have to abandon very creative structures to make it understandable to the reader.

VI-Choose where you want to publish considering the story and the different kinds of journals (peer review, student-edited). Read articles in this journal, understand the structure used and the preferences of the editors. Consider the audience and the submission process.

VII-Process hacks:
Work on your table of contents, play with it, see what fits better into the story.
Use headings to yourself while writing to be clear on what to write in each section.Create footnotes but go back and see if they are needed and if they fit the target journal.

VIII-Literature review:
Concentrate on what is relevant and original in your own article and use literature to create a dialogue.
The goal is to engage in a conversation with the people in your field and to contribute to this ongoing conversation.

IX-Consider the kind of publication (peer review might need less literature review than student-edited review for example) and decide how long it should be, whether it should be an initial section or come along your argument.

X-Policy proposal
You can address it by answering the “so-what-question”. Why does it matter? Why is it important? What should we do with that – or what sort of implications are going forward?

XI-The most important and hard part in structuring your article is the last or iterative part; you have to take a hard look back.
Question your assumptions. Act with humility. Make sure your reader can understand your argument.

XII-Anticipate the most common comments on structure: a) is it too much you are trying to tell? Should it be two of three articles? (check your table of contents); b) Are you really ready with the work? Are additional sections needed?

XIII-Check if your “final product” fits the publication goal, the journal you aim at.
Find “your people” and engage with them before publishing. Share your draft with your trusteed readers and let them read your story with rigor and kindness. Scholarship is a collective effort!