Minor revisions – new podcast from editors of Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space
introduction from Eugene McCann here; Episode 1: Luiza Bialasiewicz & Sabrina Stallone, ‘Focalizing new-Fascism’ here
Minor Revisions is a podcast that demystifies the process of writing for academic journals, from the editors of EPC: Politics & Space. Each episode of Minor Revisions features the authors of a published article unpacking their publication and revealing some secrets behind it. They tell stories of how their article came about, how they collaborated with editors and reviewers to write it, what decisions they made about literatures to draw upon, and what challenges they overcame along the way. We hope it will help you publish your research … with only minor revisions!
Minor Revisions is introduced by, and interviews are conducted by Eugene McCann, Politics & Space Managing Editor and professor of Geography at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada, on the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. The podcast is made possible with the support of Simon Fraser University’s Vancity Office of Community Engagement. Our theme music is by Konrad Urbaniak and our graphic designer is Samantha Thompson.
Please subscribe to Minor Revisions wherever you find your podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Soundcloud, Stitcher, and Google Podcasts. Write a review, share with your friends and colleagues, and consider assigning episodes to your students.
good idea as the social sciences lack the kinds of research apprenticeships one finds in bench sciences but the first episode offers little to no practical advice for folks facing framing and writing their first project.
Yes, I found it interesting as Luiza is a friend and the topic of the article was important. There was some stuff on how many drafts it went through, but not much on the reports and revision. More on the mechanics and not so much on the content might be interesting for future episodes.
yeah it was more about their investments in and the reception of the work rather than the crafting, left me wondering about how they decided that they had enough info/data to have a good grasp of the situation, how they tested or not other frames for their analysis to make sure they were being led by the research and not their personal/socialized preferences, how they decided who would do what, what other materials/references where necessary, etc., Maybe the unintentional point ended up being that such work is largely personality driven (lord knows much work is) but if that’s the case not much can be generalized from such recordings.