![\"\"](\"https:\/\/world.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/writing-skills.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
My last post, where\u00a0I called bullshit on the way we do the PhD\u00a0<\/a>seemed to hit a nerve. In fact, it got more hits in 24 hour period than I\u2019ve ever seen before.<\/p>\n Many people wrote in asking: how should I spend the remaining time in my PhD?<\/strong><\/p>\n Good question! I have a lot of thoughts. Let\u2019s start with what bugs me most: it\u2019s highly likely you will graduate a worse writer than you started. This is because we spend a lot of time teaching you how to write in a particular \u2018academic\u2019 style that, not to put too fine a point on it: sucks.<\/p>\n Academic writing, as a genre, is ritualised, peculiar, archaic and does almost as much to hide knowledge as it does to share it. Mastering academic writing is just as much about signalling you are the member of an \u2018in-group\u2019 as it is about conveying ideas.<\/p>\n Don\u2019t believe me? Look at how we use commas.<\/p>\n Commas help you create longer sentences that still make sense.\u00a0<\/strong>Without commas, you have Parataxis. Parataxis is Plain English. Just one sentence. Followed by another sentence. Parataxis is direct. Your sentences are short.<\/p>\n Perhaps too short?<\/p>\n When you have too many commas you create hypotaxis:\u00a0<\/strong>the use of clause after subordinate clause, which creates sentences of deeply satisfying complexity, that, even while you might get lost a little between the commas,\u00a0reassure the reader that an academic of sober-minded, careful, disposition is tapping away at the keyboard crafting very, very polite sentences<\/em>\u00a0which, because of those glorious clauses and subordinate clauses, will make you feel like you\u2019re eating dry toast. You\u2019re on safe ground with all that hypotactic fun, believe me,\u00a0because it\u2019s impossible to be too enthusiastic, or too rude, about anything when you write this way<\/em>. It\u2019s no wonder, since academics love being passive aggressive (which, by the way, is the avoidance of directly saying what they think) that most \u2018serious\u2019 writing is full of it.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not just our commas that reveal our petty academic hearts. I\u2019ve written before about how\u00a0academic writing can be like a painful upper-middle-class dinner party<\/a>. Using the word \u2018claims\u2019 when you are referring to another person\u2019s work is a passive-aggressive way of saying you think that scholar is suspect. If you want to compliment someone\u2019s work, you should use a verb like \u2018argues\u2019. A lot of people in my writing courses have been surprised when I point out this verbal subtext: \u2018claims\u2019 sounds like a complimentary word when in fact it\u2019s the best way to diss another scholar in your dissertation? How was I expected to know that?!<\/p>\n Academic writing doesn\u2019t get any easier when you are the supervisor instead of the student. To do well in your PhD examination, you\u2019ll need to know the \u2018tricks\u2019 academic writers use to signal they belong to a certain disciplinary tribe: hedges and boosters, signposting, conjunctive adverbs and the like. It takes so much time to teach someone this passive agressive subtext stuff. Just yesterday, I spent a good 20 minutes talking to my PhD student about whether she should use the word \u2018hesitate\u2019 in a particular sentence. I have spent literally years of my life having these conversations. Hell,\u00a0I\u2019ve even helped write a couple of books about academic writing<\/a>\u00a0to help people decode the intricacies of academic style.<\/p>\n It takes a long time to master the kind of \u2018in group\u2019 signalling that characterises academic writing. This is why we make you write a dissertation. (Actually, I am not sure if that\u2019s the reason \u2013 I honestly don\u2019t think anyone has really thought about it seriously since about 1850).<\/p>\n I wish this time was spent more fruitfully, both for advancing knowledge and for helping people get jobs when they finish.<\/p>\n The sheer amount of time you need to devote to be good at academic writing comes as a shock to many new PhD students, who thought they would be working in a lab or doing fieldwork and just \u2018writing up\u2019 what they found there. If you go into any PhD student kitchen, writing progress, feedback from supervisors on writing, confusion about writing, or writer\u2019s block, will be part of most conversations.<\/p>\n I\u2019ve been conflicted for years about my role in perpetuating the pain of academic writing on others. I\u2019ve built a career on helping people deal with the angst academic writing creates. But the angst about academic writing is justified for a very singular reason:<\/p>\n Everyone knows you can be a great researcher, creative thinker and innovator \u2013 and fail a PhD because you are a bad \u2018academic\u2019 writer.<\/strong><\/p>\n Let\u2019s dwell on that for just a moment.<\/p>\n Are we assessing the right thing here? Is it better to have someone who can\u00a0do<\/em>\u00a0the research or someone who can tell other people about it using the correct \u2018academic form\u2019? Here\u2019s the kicker: most working academics dislike writing in the \u2018correct academic style\u2019, and very few (if any?) people genuinely enjoy reading it.<\/p>\n So, I think it\u2019s time we let go of the dissertation.<\/strong><\/p>\n Yes, even the type with publications in it.<\/p>\n We could replace the dissertation with a portfolio of writing that showcases your ability to write for a range of audiences and purposes.<\/p>\n I can hear some of my colleagues gasping with shock, so let me be clear. While I think we need to change how we assess the PhD, this does not mean we get rid of a requirement to write in the \u2018correct academic form\u2019 altogether. Writing in an academic style helps us accurately report knowledge claims to other experts (and show those readers how sure we are, through the use of hedges and boosters). There\u2019s a place for this kind of writing, but we need to broaden our minds about what a professional academic writing practise can and should be.<\/p>\n A PhD writing portfolio could include academic pieces: journal articles, conference presentations and the like. These pieces would demonstrate you can do the necessary form well, when required. It goes without saying that academic form is so much more excrutiating to read when it\u2019s done badly. Scholars of writing like Helen Sword have done much to help academics improve their basic writing skills (Sword\u2019s\u00a0Stylish Academic Writing<\/em><\/a>\u00a0is a classic and I would also recommend her\u00a0Writer\u2019s Diet book<\/em><\/a>).<\/p>\n But it\u2019s not enough just to encourage PhD students and academics to write more clearly. We don\u2019t need a better form of business as usual: we need a new normal altogether. A normal that is less elitist.<\/p>\n I would be more comfortable with the emphasis we place on writing in the PhD if we were really assessing the ability to communicate, but I question if that\u2019s what\u2019s going on here. It\u2019s interesting, isn\u2019t it, that the only writing that really \u2018matters\u2019 to academic promotion and institutional prestige is the kind that\u00a0enables large academic publishers to make a lot of money from the public purse?<\/a><\/p>\n By deliberately excluding other forms of writing in the PhD, we contribute to the \u2018marketisation\u2019 of our universities: turning knowledge into a commodity that can be traded rather than a public good.<\/strong><\/p>\n Surely, in the 21st century, PhD assessment should include being able to connect with a wider audience? PhD graduates should write to influence the communities they live in, as well as other academics. If we accept this premise, we need to stop being so snobby and dismissive about \u2018other\u2019 forms of writing, especially if it\u2019s the best way to bring public attention to our research work.<\/p>\n In addition to some purely academic writing, the PhD writing portfolio I\u2019m imagining might include such things as publicly accessible reports on the implications of your research, blog posts or opinion pieces, memos to policymakers, web copy, teaching notes, instructional texts, video scripts and more. Heck, I am not against including a compendium of Tweets in there if it\u2019s appropriate! (Writing an interesting tweet that people will share is harder than you think \u2013 that\u2019s why some of us have followers in the tens of thousands and some struggle to attract more than 100 or so).<\/p>\n Our research can move the world, but not if only other academics can understand what we are saying.<\/strong><\/p>\n I know I am not alone in thinking this way. My rant only echoes what many people before have said about\u00a0obsession with accumulating CVs full of academic publications creating inequalities<\/a>; as well as those voices who have called academics out for the way academic language perpetuates\u00a0racism<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0sexism.<\/a><\/p>\n Many people are resisting the academic CV hunger games and choosing other forms of public engagement. If you are one of these people who tirelessly blog, write opinion articles and textbooks, yet struggle to be promoted and rewarded for your efforts \u2013 I witness you!<\/p>\n In these desperate times, perhaps those of us who want change are more likely to be heard?<\/p>\n Changing the PhD assessment has the potential to change our academy for the better. The obsession with communicating in elaborate insider language has done our profession great harm. More people read books by\u00a0Paleo-crazies like Pete Evans<\/a>\u00a0than actual health academics. The facts people need to counter conspiracy theories are behind paywalls, while the damaging lies are out there, for free, on \u2018wellness blogs\u2019.<\/p>\n One way to get people to respect expert voices is to actually let them hear what we have to say.<\/strong><\/p>\n This means we have to radically re-think how we teach writing. Why don\u2019t we teach PhD students to write best selling non-fiction as well as journal papers? Imagine graduating, and instead of just writing a book for, I don\u2019t know, Cambridge University Press, you also write a non-fiction bestseller and pocket all those royalties? (my friend Lynn did<\/a>). How about you then leverage that book fame into a Netflix documentary series? You could do this if you learned a more comprehensive range of writing and pitching skills during your PhD. More to the point, you could do this if you didn\u2019t have that giant dissertation albatross around your neck.<\/p>\n Our obsession with forcing people to learn and replicate \u2018correct\u2019 academic genre forms is the most significant barrier to making the PhD relevant and useful in the 21st century. There are a LOT of research focussed jobs outside academia that ask for writing skills. The ability to write clearly and quickly is an incredible career asset \u2013 one you will not develop if you spend a lot of time perfecting \u2018good academic form\u2019.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not healthy for academics on the payroll to focus exclusively on academic forms of publishing either: there\u2019s no guarantee a huge, research-heavy CV will save your job when the cuts start.<\/strong><\/p>\n In my previous post, I pointed out that Covid19 seems to have destroyed the academic job market. How long the market will stay frozen is unknown, but as I write, the mass retrenchment of university workers has started. Yesterday colleagues at Deakin University were told they would be let go; in one department seven people were told to apply for the same job.<\/p>\n Twitter erupted in grief and outrage, to say nothing of the back channels of personal communication via text and tearful Zoom calls. One thing was resoundingly clear: having a long list of journal papers didn\u2019t save people from the chopping block. In difficult times, universities focus on key revenue streams, and the primary one will always be teaching. Trust me: management understand that the skills involved in writing and teaching great online courses is different from those required to get an academic paper through peer review.<\/p>\n So, to answer the original question, what should you spend more time doing while you are still enrolled in your PhD?<\/strong><\/p>\n Start that PhD writing portfolio now. It might not be assessed by your examiners, but it will be assessed by future employers, who are less likely to care about H-indexes. Stop thinking of yourself as a future academic who only writes journal articles and maybe a monograph or two. Start thinking of yourself as a domain specific, but multi-talented, professional writer who can help people make better decisions by making knowledge more accessible.<\/p>\n At least, that\u2019s what you should be able to put on your CV by the time you finish.<\/p>\n To this end, ask yourself: what kind of written pieces would I have to show someone to demonstrate I am a multi-talented, yet domain specific writer? Better still \u2013 identify the audiences that would benefit from learning about your research and ask them what sort of things they would like to read (if I ran the university, you would be forced to do this exercise as part of your scoping work, but it\u2019s never too late to find out who might be interested). Then go ahead and write those pieces! Publish them where interested people can encounter and access them easily (professional magazines and industry body newsletters are often a good place to start). Include any unpublished pieces on your Linkedin profile, so people see how capable you are as a writer.<\/p>\n I can hear you worrying now: \u201cThat\u2019s easier said than done Inger! I\u2019m in a system here and it doesn\u2019t support me to do what you say\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n True. Your supervisor may not be able, or interested in helping you. It\u2019s likely that you will get little encouragement and even less reward for doing what I suggest. But universities are treasure troves of knowledge and clever people. Look around for the help and support you need \u2013 I bet it\u2019s there, maybe in the form of the media office. If it\u2019s not, ask your university to provide you with appropriate professional development workshops instead of yet another journal writing workshop (especially one run by a publisher with a vested interest in you pouring energy and ideas to a system that has made their shareholders rich, but I digress).<\/p>\n Recognise that your ability to write about research \u2013 your own research and other people\u2019s \u2013 is a remarkable career asset. Your ability and tolerance for difficult, complicated and boring reading tasks is unparalleled. I challenge anyone else to come close to the amount of knowledge you are capable of chewing through and making sense of in a week. And your stamina! Who else in the world can say\u00a0\u201cyou want me to spend more than three years reading around 400 books and articles on the same subject? And some of them are almost inpenetrable academic gibberish? No problem!\u201d<\/em>. Employers need people to help them make sense of published research and advise on applying research to their problems. They need people to do new research that will give them a competitive advantage. You can\u2019t make AI that does this (at least not yet). There are so many, many problems in a recession, and they will be so very difficult. People like you are solid gold.<\/p>\n Even if you can\u2019t get a job outside academia with your writing abilities straight away, you can certainly use them in your own research consulting business. So make a serious effort to get even faster and better at writing \u2013 it\u2019s a craft that can be learned, not a natural ability. Continue to read books on writing correct academic style (you still have to push out that dissertation after all), but be sure to include other books on clarity and even books on fiction writing, which can teach you different story telling techniques. Make the dissertation shorter to create time for other kinds of writing. Just because an institution sets a maximum word limit, doesn\u2019t mean you have to write to it, in fact\u00a0there is evidence that many examiners would prefer you didn\u2019t.<\/a><\/p>\n No doubt, some of you will experience push back if you do what I suggest here, especially by supervisors who are invested on having their name on your papers (conveniently reducing the need for them to do this kind of boring writing themselves). You\u2019ll have to balance off the requirements of your degree and keeping people happy with future-proofing your career. It\u2019s going to be tricky, but you\u2019re smart and capable. I\u2019m confident you can work it out.<\/p>\n The comments are still off but feel free to talk to me on social media. I\u2019m listening \u2013 and cheering you on.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"