Writing for Publication: Transitions and Tools that Support Scholars’ Success - Mary Renck Jalongo, Olivia N. Saracho 2016

Abstract
From a Single Work to Multiple Scholarly Spin-Offs
Writing as Professional Development

Scholarly productivity depends upon making good choices about which projects to pursue; this is how this chapter begins. One common question from graduate students and college/university faculty members is how to produce multiple publications from the same basic body of work. This chapter provides direction on “working smarter” without succumbing to self-plagiarism. Although doctoral students and university faculty typically are involved in many different types of grants and projects; they may not know how to move beyond those experiences to share them successfully with a wider audience. This chapter supports readers in planning a manuscript that follows the structure best suited for descriptions of projects and grants, namely: Needs Assessment, Design/Planning, Implementation, and Outcomes/Evaluation. Readers are advised to use logic models for program evaluation as a way to enhance success with grants and projects.

While hosting two visiting researchers from Japan, I asked if there was anything in particular that they would like to do now that their interviews and site visits were over. One of the professors had attended Columbia University in New York and said, “We want to go to a big, United States grocery store” and I obliged. As we walked through the store, one of them said, “We are not familiar with this word, B-O-G-O. What does it mean?” “Oh,” I said, “it is an acronym that means buy one, get one—the second one is free.” They looked at each other, smiled, and she replied, “We like this idea very much.” The prospect of a BOGO in writing is equally attractive to authors. Strategies for getting more than one project from the same basic literature review is what this chapter is all about. We included grants here because they are a type of writing that often is rewarded at postsecondary institutions yet their potential for publication is not necessarily realized (Naish, 2013).

The chapter begins with a discussion of scholarly productivity and components that are commonly used to evaluate faculty. It then moves into ways to identify projects with high potential for generating various types of work products that help authors to attain their goals. Next, it addresses grant proposals as a writing task. The chapter concludes with guidelines on what is acceptable—or not—where “spin-offs” in academic endeavors are concerned.