‘It gave me something stable to stand on’: demystifying the academic publication process for doctoral candidates through inclusive pedagogies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi39.1577Keywords:
doctoral writing, academic publishing, communities of practice, pedagogies of care, feminist pedagogiesAbstract
Doctoral candidates often face significant challenges when engaging with the academic publication process, navigating complex disciplinary expectations with limited institutional support. This article evaluates a pedagogical initiative designed to demystify academic publishing through a structured, collaborative, and inclusive approach. Drawing on Belcher (2019), we implemented a 12-session workshop series, Publish Your Article!, integrating guided discussions, facilitated writing retreats, and peer interaction. Using a mixed-methods design, we analysed participant reflections from questionnaires and focus groups to assess the provision’s impact. Findings suggest that candidates initially perceived academic writing as an obscure and performative practice. Through sustained scaffolding and a Community of Practice framework (Lave & Wenger, 1991), participants began to reconceptualise writing as a developmental process, strengthening their confidence and sense of scholarly legitimacy. The study challenges ‘sink or swim’ models of publication support and advocates for embedded, sustainable learning development initiatives that meaningfully empower doctoral researchers.
References
Aitchison, C., & Guerin, C. (2014). Writing groups for doctoral education and beyond: Innovations in practice and theory. Routledge.
Ali, A., Crawford, J., Cejnar, L., Harman, K., & Sim, K. W. (2021). What student evaluations are not: Scholarship of teaching and learning using student evaluations. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 18(8). Article 1. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.18.8.1
Belcher, L. W. (2019). Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. Sage.
Carver, M. (2024). Assessing doctorateness in the professional doctorate portfolio for language practitioners: From publishability to impact. In S. W. Chong & H. Reindeers (Eds.), Innovation in language learning and teaching (pp. 205–224). Springer Nature.
Cerdá, Y. (2022). Feminism: Affordances and applications for EAP. In A. Ding & M. Evans (Eds.), Social theory for English for academic purposes: Foundations and perspectives. Bloomsbury Academic.
Cotterall, S. (2011). Doctoral students writing: Where’s the pedagogy? Teaching in Higher Education, 16(4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.560381
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107
Fisher, B. M. (2000). No angel in the classroom. Rowman & Littlefield.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. (M. B. Ramos, Trans.) Continuum. (Original work published 1970).
Gee, J. P. (2000). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X025001099
Grant, A., & Pittaway, S. (2024). An introduction to a pedagogy of kindness. In A. Grant, & S. Pittaway (Eds.), Enacting a pedagogy of kindness: A guide for practitioners in higher education (pp. 1–7). Routledge.
Hall, L. (2020). Men of the house: Oppressive husbands and displaced wives in interwar, war and postwar women’s fictions (Daphne du Maurier, Dorothy Whipple, Elizabeth Taylor). In S. Kennedy, & J. Thomas (Eds.), British women’s writing, 1930 to 1960: Between the waves (pp. 161–178). Liverpool University Press.
Hall, L. & Plain, G. (2016). Unspeakable heroism: The second world war and the end of the hero. In B. Korte, & S. Lethbridge (Eds.), Heroes and heroism in British fiction – case studies (pp. 117–134). Palgrave Macmillan.
Hall, L., & Villegas, P. (2025). ‘We are all in this together’: The role of collaborative writing sessions in developing doctoral candidates’ confidence to engage in the academic publication process. In N. Lemon, A. Bolzle, M. Santa Cruz, & R. Saunders (Eds.), Fostering wellbeing through collective writing practices: Shut Up and Write! in higher education settings (pp. 126–131). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003633327-18
Harland, T. (2010). Practitioner action research for studying higher education and improving the quality of teaching. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 7, 1–14. https://e-journal.uum.edu.my/index.php/mjli/article/view/7617
Harvey, W. S., & Spee, A. P. (2023). Walking the tightrope of academic and practitioner expectations in field research. Management Learning, 55(5), 769–789. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076231213176
Heron, M., Gravett, K., & Yakovchuk, N. (2021). Publishing and flourishing: Writing for desire in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(3), 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1773770
hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. South End Press.
Ivankova, N., & Greer, J. (2015). Mixed methods research analysis. In B. Paltridge, & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource. Bloomsbury.
Jarl, M., Taube, M., & Björklund, C. (2024). Exploring roles in teacher–researcher collaboration: Examples from a Swedish research–practice partnership in education. Education Inquiry, 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2024.2324518
Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision. Routledge.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30–35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27558571
Kirschener, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Larivière, V., Pontille, D., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2021). Investigating the division of scientific labor using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT). Quantitative Science Studies 2(1), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00097
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079812331380364
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. Routledge.
MacDonald, A. (2024). Storying unlearning for intended, enacted and felt kindness in online environs: Implications and opportunities for people, pedagogies and place. In A. Grant, & S. Pittaway (Eds.), Enacting a pedagogy of kindness. Routledge.
MacDonald, J. (2016). The margins as third space: EAP teacher professional identity in the university. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, 34(1), 111–116. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v34i1.1258
McGrail, M. R., Rickard, C. M., & Jones, R. (2006). Publish or perish: A systematic review of provisions to increase academic publication rates. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360500453053
Öz, A. B. (2024). Overcoming alphabetical disadvantage: Factors influencing the use of surname initial techniques and their impact on citation rates in the four major disciplines of social sciences. Scientometrics, 129, 4885–4908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05100-5
Pellack, L. J., & Kappmeyer, L. O. (2011). The ripple effect of women’s name changes in indexing, citation, and authority control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(3), 440–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21469
Suh, E., & Jensen, D. (2020). Examining communities of practice: Transdisciplinarity, resilience, and professional identity. Journal of Basic Writing, 39(2), 33–59. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27091993
Smyth, J. (2017). The toxic university: Zombie leadership, academic rock stars and neoliberal ideology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
Syska, A., & McDonald, C. (2025). Editorial: Third space in HE. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 33, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi33.1530
Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–211. http://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302814
Taylor, J. A., Bowen, G. M., Kubsch, M., Summers, R., Sezen‐Barrie, A., Patrick, P., Lachapelle, C., Warfa, A., & Guzey, S. S. (2023). Crossing boundaries between research and practitioner communities: The role of research use and cross‐community journal authorship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(7), 1727–1754. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21914
Tuck, J. (2018). ‘I’m nobody’s mum in this university’: The gendering of work around student writing in UK higher education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 32, 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.03.006
Overgaard, C., Mackaway, J., Adelaide, D., Stephens, L. E., & Harrison, M. (2024). The muscular realities of enacting a PoK in teaching practice. In A. Grant, & S. Pittaway (Eds.), Enacting a pedagogy of kindness: A guide for practitioners in higher education (pp. 50–65). Routledge.
Villegas, P. (2022). Beyond the four pillars of F-L-I-P: Exploring theoretical underpinnings of flipped learning in the context of English for academic purposes. The Language Scholar, 10, 7–30. https://languagescholar.leeds.ac.uk/beyond-the-four-pillars-of-f-l-i-p-exploring-theoretical-underpinnings-of-flipped-learning-in-the-context-of-english-for-academic-purposes/
Villegas, P. (2024). What the FLIP do they think is going on? Learners’ and practitioners’ understanding of flipped learning in an emergency remote teaching English for academic purposes pre-sessional course. International Journal of English for Academic Purposes: Research and Practice, 4(2), 151–176. https://doi.org/10.3828/ijeap.2024.10
Walker-Gleaves, C. (2019). Is caring pedagogy really so progressive? Exploring the conceptual and practical impediments to operationalizing care in higher education. In P. Gibbs, & A. Peterson (Eds.), Higher education and hope: Institutional, pedagogical and personal possibilities (pp. 93–112). Palgrave Macmillan.
Watermeyer, R., Lanclos, D., & Phipps, L. (2024). Citation metrics and highly ranked scholars: Spinning the myth of meritocracy. Postdigital Science and Education, 7, 1085–1091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-024-00519-8
Wellington, J., & Sikes, P. (2006). ‘A doctorate in a tight compartment’: Why do students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their personal and professional lives? Studies in Higher Education, 31(6), 723–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601004358
Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015, June). Introduction to communities of practice: A brief overview of the concept its uses. https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/
Whitchurch, C. (2008). Shifting identities and blurring boundaries: The emergence of third space professionals in UK higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00387.x
Whitchurch, C., & Healy, G. (2024). The concept of third space as an enabler in complex higher education environments. London Review of Education, 22(1), Article 42. https://doi.org/10.14324/LRE.22.1.42
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
