Course Summary
This course is designed to help researchers and students understand the complex landscape of scholarly communication, and to help them develop skills to communicate their research effectively.Key Learning Points
- Learn about the history and evolution of scholarly communication
- Explore various forms of scholarly communication, including traditional and new media
- Develop skills to effectively communicate research findings and navigate the publishing process
Related Topics for further study
Learning Outcomes
- Understand the history and evolution of scholarly communication
- Develop skills to effectively communicate research findings
- Navigate the publishing process
Prerequisites or good to have knowledge before taking this course
- Basic understanding of research methods
- Familiarity with academic writing and publishing
Course Difficulty Level
IntermediateCourse Format
- Self-paced
- Online
Similar Courses
- Academic Writing Made Easy
- Open Science: Sharing Your Research with the World
- How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper (Project-Centered Course)
Notable People in This Field
- Stephen B. Heard
- Melanie Nelson
Related Books
Description
Scholarly Communication is a concise but comprehensive course on how to write research papers in English. The course will help the candidates gain a better understanding of the rhetorical conventions of English and the common challenges the candidates may face as an academic writer. The course provides instruction, exercises, structure, and deadlines needed to create a publishable paper.
Outline
- Science Writing
- Welcome words
- Writing in English
- Anglo-American Rhetorical Traditions
- Golden Rules of Scientific Writing
- Clarity, Precision, and Accuracy
- Hedging
- Fuzzy and Smothered Words
- Function and Structure Words
- I and We in Scientific Writing
- Who, Which, … or That?
- Elena Bazanova
- MIPT
- LTTC
- Grading Policy
- Supplementary materials
- Takeaways
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- End-of-Module Test
- The Challenge
- Wayward Modifiers
- Hidden Negation
- Active vs. Passive
- Tenses in Scientific Writing
- Punctuation
- A Unit of Composition
- Anglo-American Style of Argumentation
- Presenting Results or Telling a Story?
- Journal Analysis
- Supplementary materials
- Takeaways
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- End-of-Module Test
- The Manuscript
- Manuscript Guidelines: Insider Knowledge
- The IMRaD Format
- Introduction
- Materials and Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- Title, Abstract, and Keywords
- Acknowledgments
- References
- Supplementary materials
- Takeaways
- FAQ concerning peer-review assignments.
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- End-of-Module Test
- Scientific Communication
- Self-Editing Checklist
- Manuscript Submission
- The Road to Calvary
- Ethics
- Self-Promotion
- Interview
- Interview
- Goodbye Message
- Supplementary materials
- FAQ concerning peer-review assignments.
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- Self-assessment
- Progress Check
- End-of-Module Test
- Final Test
Summary of User Reviews
Learn the fundamentals of scholarly communication and how to enhance your research impact through various channels. This course has received high praise from users for its comprehensive coverage of the topic and practical applications.Key Aspect Users Liked About This Course
Many users appreciated the course's focus on how to enhance research impact through various channels.Pros from User Reviews
- Comprehensive coverage of the topic
- Practical applications for enhancing research impact
- Engaging and knowledgeable instructors
- Useful tools and resources provided
- Flexible schedule allows for self-paced learning
Cons from User Reviews
- Some users felt that the course was too basic for their level of expertise
- Occasional technical issues with the platform
- Limited interaction with other learners
- Some assignments were repetitive or redundant
- Not all topics covered in equal depth