1. Helen Fallon, NUI Maynooth
Helen.b.fallon@nuim.ie
Anne Murphy, Tallaght Hospital
anne.murphy04@amnch.ie
l

2. Background
Blended Learning Approach
Feedback
Outcomes

3.  One Day Academic Writing
Workshops
 Blended Academic Writing
Programme 2011
◦ One Day Writing Seminar
◦ Online Programme of writing tasks
◦ Two peer feedback days spread over nine months

4. ANLTC
23 people attended
◦ 19 HE institutions
◦ 2 Public libraries
◦ 2 Health Sciences Libraries

5. And a Writing
Group for those
interested...
Posters invited
for the seminar

6.  2 stages
 Stage 1 (tasks 1-7) over 3 months
 Peer-feedback day
 Stage 2 over 5 months
 Peer-feedback day

7.  7 Tasks based on article The
Academic Writing Toolkit
http://eprints.nuim.ie/1387/
 E-mail guidance based on article in
more informal language
 Mentor & participant

8.  Task 1 – Develop a working title and 3 three
keywords for your article
 Task 2 - What is the audience and purpose for
your article? What journal/conference might you
submit to?
 Task 3 –Write a 80-200 word informative or
structured abstract for your article

9. A working title and 3 keywords
 Task 1 – 7 days
 And a May date proposed for completed
first drafts
Audience, Purpose, Publication
 Task 2 - 10 days
“I'm enjoying the process and finding the
structured approach invaluable.”
Abstract/Outlining
 Task 3 – 7 days

10. Usually my writing projects have
involved jumping right in to the
writing phase. I rarely gave time
to sitting down and thinking about
my keywords or title

11. The group was a useful forum for
getting suggestions on possible
outlets for articles. This included
suggestions on possible
conferences to present at, which
is a useful precursor to publishing
an article

12. I appreciated one suggestion at the
beginning on possible journals for
the article. This made it a realistic
goal and definitely helped me focus
on what I wanted to say. Before I
would never have thought about who
the final article was intended for

13. Task 4 - Outline and title
Task 5 - Draft 500 words
Task 6 - Continue to 1,000
words
Task 7 - Online Peer
Feedback

14. Draw up an outline for your article
 Task 4 – 7 days
Drafting 500 words
Task 5 – 7 days
“ Found this part [writing the Methods section]
quite demanding and feel lots of info is missing,
probably that's an entirely normal experience..”
Drafting to 1000 words
Task 6 - 12 days

15. Before this, I would probably work on
entire sections at a time and in
chronological order. I never felt I could
move on to the next section until the
previous section was complete. Dipping
in and out of sections in shorter bursts of
time really helps me write more
productively

16. [I realised] that my experience was what
was key. The lit review, analysis, etc.,
could all be built around that
Something that stuck with me is that “bad”
writing is ok at first to get the article on
paper in some form initially

17. I realised] that I had worthwhile
experiences to bring to the table
and that perfection and starting
with an expectation of a very high
standard was not needed – just
start writing and then develop/edit
as you go

18. It’s amazing how this early work can evolve
over the following weeks. I found myself
reading back over my work from the early
tasks and making changes (to both the
article and my structure. I found myself
justifying any changes I made. It meant
that I was considering my changes and
why they were occurring. It felt like my
article was evolving!

19. It didn't feel intimidating or like
it was too onerous to complete
All your work/ideas are
exposed and that can be a
very daunting thing

20. “I'm unsure what level it's at - but this I hope to
discover through the peer review process!”
Guidelines
◦ What do you like best about this piece?
◦ What is your main suggestion for
improvement? (20 words or less)
◦ Overview of how this might be achieved (1
paragraph)
 Received and provided feedback via email to 5
peers

21. I never realised the benefit of getting input
on my work halfway through completion
After the peer feedback the focus of the
article became clearer and I decided to
change tack and target a professional
journal and write about my own
experience. I felt in more control of the
article and less stressed

22.  trust, openness and support between
participants
 demanding ... hear everyone's feedback without
being defensive ... had to work at that
 energising ... we experienced flow
 most valuable ... taking part in the dialogue ... to
reflect back ... the value of their work and
experience ... to see the light in someone's eyes
as they realised the worth of what they do.

23. I was surprised at my own psychological
behaviour in terms of acting so
aggressively and defensive initially
towards the feedback I received. I felt my
draft was being torn to shreds by the
criticism, which is all part of the learning
experience. Their views and feedback
were very worthwhile, and provided more
focus and elucidation on the sections
which needed to be developed

24. IBTS
Writing time
Flexible timetable
Action learning sets

25.  Participants reported high rate of
conference presentations including
three international conferences
 One participant won AISHE poster
competition
 Journal articles including SCONUL
Focus, An Leabharlann, Transfusion
 Book review

26. Conference & seminar
presentations
Published the journal review
study
Invited to present at seminars
Invited to peer review for HILJ
Authorship w/ clinical teams

27.  Demystify writing process
 Learned about the mechanics of writing
 Incremental tasks made the process
more manageable
 Provided a supportive community of
practice – sharing of knowledge,
information & insights from across
different types of libraries

28.  Allowed people choose their time for
writing
 People developed resilience through
peer-feedback
 Cost effective
 Normalise writing as part of what we
do – we all have valuable work
experiences for
posters/articles/presentations

29. Academicwritinglibrarian.blogspot.ie