1. 1 of 35 Dr. Anne Adams a.adams@open.ac.uk Esteem Dissemination

2. 2 of 35 Overview  Why Disseminate Research = Where  Different dissemination routes  Structuring for academic writing (Hourglass Model)  Engaging yet Credible balance  Rules of Thumb

3. 3 of 35 Why Publish? Discuss  Why do you want to disseminate your research ?  To make what impact?  On who?  When (short / long term impacts)?

4. 4 of 35 Blogs / web-pages All photos © Nokia Levels of repute - VARY Online / Hard-Copy Internal – technical reports Books Conference papers Journals

5. 5 of 35 TAKE HOME MESSAGE  AUDIENCE  Appropriate mechanisms  Appropriate language  Appropriate time-frames

6. 6 of 35 Balancing ACT An report is a ‘STORY’ : beginning, middle, end Balancing creativity and credibility. WHAT IS THE ‘TAKE HOME MESSAGE’

7. 7 of 35 Discipline Variation Discuss what has impact in these disciplines:  Science  Maths  Technology & Computing  Education and Arts  Business

8. 8 of 35 Examples of Publication Routes Conferences  Education: BERA, AERA, Handheld Computing, Mobi-learn, PCF5  Computing:  Science: SLTC (HEA)  Maths:  Technology & Computing  Journal of educational resources in computing  International computing education research workshop  Annual joint conference integrating technology into computer science education  Technical symposium on computer science education  Conference on Information technology education  Education and Arts  Business

9. 9 of 35 Hourglass Abstract References / Appendix Introduction Background / Literature Review Method (procedure, subjects, apparatus, analysis method) Aims / Objectives Results Discussion Conclusion & Further Research

10. 10 of 35 Discipline Variation Method What done Theories and Discussion

11. 11 of 35 All photos © Nokia Engaging / Credible

12. 12 of 35 Balancing ACT Balancing the notion of creativity and structure, research findings and novel concepts. An article is a ‘STORY’ beginning, middle, end

13. 13 of 35 Support reviewing Each paper section and what it give to the overall Credibility / Engagement Background – engaging Lit rev – gives credibility … based on solid background BUT should be route to show who NOVEL, Engaging your approach to this is e.g. criticise, limitations, what great things found Method – Credibility, contextual details can make it more engaging Results – Credible yet engage with ‘wetting’ the appetite … INITIAL summary RAW findings Discussion – Engaging discussion & drawing out of story…. With credibility increased through relating to findings AND highlighting what more you’ve found that others re. literature. Conclusion – Engaging ….. Credible summary & future directions

14. 14 of 35 All photos © Nokia Button Pressing

15. 15 of 35 Support reviewing Discuss points that support : marking, reading, summarising? Are these different to you as an author supporting someone reviewing your paper?

16. 16 of 35 Support reviewing What would a reviewer say if a piece of work is: Credible YET not engaging – be done before!!! Engaging YET not credible – don’t believe it, not valued – people who don’t agree will denounce it on its credibility.

17. 17 of 35 All photos © Nokia Rules of Thumb

18. 18 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Review THEIR previous papers  What is published in this forum before  What published in this Thread before  What published in similar forums  What are they saying should be done next

19. 19 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Ideas  FIT with Route of Dissemination  FIT with Thread  Mad / Novel / Extending / Done before  Decisions often made in first few sentences

20. 20 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Language & Terminology  Subjective / Objective  discipline dependent

21. 21 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Clarity  Keep titles short  Keep sentences to the point  State then explain – examples good idea

22. 22 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Literature Review  Historically - what done so far  Arguments – for and against  Justification – for gap in literature

23. 23 of 35 Rules of Thumb  Clarity  Keep titles short  Keep sentences to the point  State then explain – examples good idea  LANGUAGE – do they understand your terms  FOCUS  what done so far  WHY did you do it  What does this mean for your reader

24. 24 of 35 Rules of Thumb  FOCUS  what done so far  WHY did you do it  What does this mean for your reader  AUDIENCE & MESSAGE  For your colleagues  For SPECIFIC Course Teams  For the OU as a whole  For a research sector as a whole  For the public

25. 25 of 35 Write Message Write for each of these audiences a KEY message  For your colleagues  For SPECIFIC Course Teams  For the OU as a whole  For a research sector as a whole  For the public

26. 26 of 35 Present that Message  Present those messages as a whole for  Colleague, Specific Course Team, OU, research sector, public  Discussion after each sector presentation  Plenary discussion before lunch

27. 27 of 35 Impact Activities Write for each of these audiences HOW to grab their attention – a mechanism  For your colleagues  For SPECIFIC Course Teams  For the OU as a whole  For a research sector as a whole  For the public

28. 28 of 35 Write Message Add for each of these audiences HOW to grab their attention – a mechanism  For your colleagues  For SPECIFIC Course Teams  For the OU as a whole  For a research sector as a whole  For the public Add in time-frames

29. 29 of 35 Would you be convinced to change your teaching practices by an 8 /10 cats prefer approach?

30. 30 of 35 OR Would you need a convincing argument / story as to why you need to change?

31. 31 of 35 Have you ever changed your vote because of a voting poll – OR would a convincing argument / story change your mind?