using a writing retreat to enhance the research and publication efforts of medical librarians
DESCRIPTION
Contributed paper with co-author Jack Bullion on developing a writing retreat in conjunction with our chapter's annual meeting.TRANSCRIPT
Using a Writing Retreat to Enhance the Research and Publication Efforts of Medical Librarians: A Case StudyPresented October 23, 2014 at the UNYOC Annual Meeting, Saratoga Springs, NY
Stewart Brower, MLS, AHIP, Director, Schusterman Library, University of [email protected] Jack Bullion, MLS, AHIP Lead Medical Librarian, Texas Health Resources, Fort Worth, [email protected]
Goals of the Writing Retreat• This paper describes an initiative undertaken by the South
Central Chapter to develop a two-day writing retreat to coincide with their chapter’s 2012 and 2013 annual meetings (and the 2014 Quint Meeting) for those members who wanted to advance research projects toward publication
• By the end of the retreat, attendees will• demonstrate significant progress on their manuscripts• apply all applicable writing and revision suggestions from
peers and retreat facilitators• determine the optimal journal(s) to submit their projects
for publication• develop a plan and timeline for their project beyond the
retreat2
Academic Writing Retreat• Offers scholars a relaxed, comfortable space where they may
focus on research projects away from distraction• Provides participants who may lack knowledge about the
process of writing for professional publication a chance to learn from experienced mentors and form peer groups with other scholars
• Literature: Horstmann and Theeke (2011), Jackson (2008) (nursing); Tysick and Babb (2006) (library)
• Many medical librarians never pursue research opportunities beyond papers and posters at professional meetings (Starr, 2011)
3
History of the SCC/MLA Writing Retreat
• Co-sponsored by SCAMeL and SCC
• First offered at the 2012 SCC/MLA Annual Meeting in Lubbock and the 2013 meeting in Fort Worth
• Attendees allowed full run of the host medical library workspace, wireless internet access, and printing
4
Pictured: Panoramic view of the main mountain range of Lubbock, TX, from study room in TTUHSC Library
Process• Prospective attendees were asked to submit a paragraph-
length summary of their manuscript’s topic and their individual goals
• There was no set requirement for individual manuscript progress; facilitators encouraged attendees to submit their topics whether they had a full work-in-progress in need of review or simply an idea in rough outline form• To date, no prospective attendees have been turned away thanks
to generosity of our sponsors• Prior to the event, facilitators also encouraged attendees to
submit inspirational quotes about the writing process for collection in the packet of materials to be distributed on-site
5
The Workshop Method• Provides a framework for a
constructive group discussion of a piece of writing
• Requires authors furnish questions about their manuscript-in-progress derived from their personal goals
• Enables other participants (serving as reviewers) to offer targeted feedback to the writer 6
Questions & Goals
Positive Feedback
Directed Feedback
Open Feedback
Day 1• Facilitators distribute information packets containing the
project summaries and writing goals of each participant, as well as explanations of the workshop method and writing exercises
• Attendees introduce their topics to the group and outline their goals for writing over the next two days
• Scheduled “decompression time” (full group meetings) provide attendees with a forum to discuss progress and problems with they might be experiencing with their manuscripts
• At the conclusion of day 1, attendees print off their manuscripts-in-progress and distribute copies to the full group for review
7
Day 2• Two full hours of workshopping• Facilitators encourage attendees to convey goals for their writing
and ask three targeted questions of the group about their output• Each manuscript allotted 20-30 minutes of discussion
• Four to six more hours of uninterrupted writing time for attendees to continue working on their manuscripts and to incorporate facilitators’ and peers’ suggested edits
8
Results
Follow-up surveys administered to attendees after the conclusion of each retreat• 93% of respondents surveyed over the past two years• agreed the retreat helped them meet the writing goals they had
at the outset• would continue to work on their projects away from the retreat• found the setting (health sciences library) conducive to getting
work done on their manuscripts• would encourage others to attend the retreat in the future
9
Feedback from Respondents
I didn't come close to finishing my article, but I gained a very strong understanding of what I needed to do before I could work on it any further. (2012)
I was able to make significant progress on 2 papers and this momentum allowed me to continue to make progress after returning to work. (2012)
The 2013 retreat goal for me was 'finish the book chapter'. The retreat allowed me to have conversations about my draft (which I honestly could no longer read without an anxiety attack) with others who had published under the same editor, & let me put the blessed thing to bed. (2013)
10
PublicationsFrom the Lubbock and Fort Worth cohorts, at least:• 24 non-peer reviewed
articles (columns, invited works, newsletters, conference proceedings, etc.)• 2 book chapters• 7 peer-reviewed articles
11
Pictured: the Writing Retreat cohort outside UNTHSC’s Lewis Health Science Library, Fort Worth, TX
Quint Writing Retreat 2014• Invited participation
from 4 other chapters• Blended cohort with
representation from SCCMLA, MCMLA, MLGSCA, NCNMLG• Held at the Health
Sciences Library on the Anschutz Medical Campus of the University of Colorado October 12-13, 2014 12
Selected ReadingHorstman P, Theeke L. Using a professional writing retreat to enhance professional publications, presentations, and research development with staff nurses. J Nurses Staff Dev. March 2012;28(2):66-68.
Jackson D. Mentored residential writing retreats: a leadership strategy to develop skills and generate outcomes in writing for publication. Nurse Educ Today, 2009; 29(1):9-15.
Starr S. Survey research: we can do better. J Med Libr Assoc. January 2012 (1):1-2.
Tysick C, Babb N. PERSPECTIVES ON: Writing Support for Junior Faculty Librarians: A Case Study. Journal of Academic Librarianship. January 2006;32(1):94-100.
13
Questions?
14