Nurse Education Today 34 (2014) 1–5 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Nurse Education Today journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/nedt Review Getting published: Reflections of a collaborative writing group Valerie Ness a,⁎,1, Kathleen Duffy b,2, Jacqueline McCallum c,3, Lesley Price d,4 a Caledonian University, Room A417, Govan Mbeki Building, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, United Kingdom b NHS Lanarkshire, Practice Development Centre, 14 Beckford Street, Hamilton ML3 0TA, United Kingdom c Caledonian University, Room A511, Govan Mbeki Building, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, United Kingdom d Caledonian University, Room A534, Govan Mbeki Building, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, United Kingdom article info summary Article history: Background: Writing for publication, in the nursing profession, is considered essential for the development of the Accepted 31 March 2013 profession and individual career advancement. In education there is also the increasing pressure to produce University research output. Keywords: Objective: To develop a collaborative writing group to develop and write articles relating to our teaching practice. Writing for publication Method: The idea of forming a writing group was discussed at a module team meeting where five academics Writing group expressed an interest. The process of forming the group involved an initial meeting to discuss and agree to the Collaboration aims, interests, expertise and areas of responsibility for each member. Regular meetings are held and each member takes on responsibility for an aspect of work towards completing the articles. Results: Three articles and one editorial have been published and another is under peer review. We have endeavoured to develop and maintain a theme, this being supporting nursing students' development with an emphasis on an aspect of their decision making skills. Also, importantly, we have created a supportive environ- ment and friendships. Conclusions: The demands made upon the nurse educator to be clinically, educationally and research active can be difficult to meet. Collaborative writing groups may be one way to fulfil the scholarly activity element. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents Introduction ................................................................. 1 Literature Review .............................................................. 2 Forming the Group .............................................................. 2 Feelings About Writing Collaboratively .................................................... 3 Why it Works for Us ............................................................. 4 Looking to the Future ............................................................. 4 References .................................................................. 4 Introduction In the nursing profession there is increased pressure to write and publish (Stone et al., 2010). This drive to publish is well established as ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 41 331 8813; fax: +1 41 331 8312. nursing academics have been engaged in the pursuit of nursing as a E-mail addresses: [email protected] (V. Ness), [email protected] (K. Duffy), [email protected] (J. McCallum), [email protected] (L. Price). profession and as a distinct discipline since the 1950s (D'Antonio, 1 Home: Flat 2/1, 140 Raeberry Street, Glasgow G20 6EA, United Kingdom. 1997). Writing for publication is considered essential for the develop- 2 Home: 22 Allendale, Stewartfield, East Kilbride G74 4JD, United Kingdom. Tel.: +1 ment of the profession, career advancement for individuals and for 698 201424. evidence of the productivity of universities (Keen, 2007). In the United 3 Home: 9 Birklands Wynd, Kilwinning, Ayrshire KA13 6NP, United Kingdom. Tel.: +1 Kingdom (UK), similar to other countries as diverse as Mexico and 41 331 3068; fax: +1 41 331 8312. 4 Home: 122 Comiston Drive, Edinburgh EH10 5QU, United Kingdom. Tel.: +1 41 Australia (Teodorescu, 2000; Rickard et al., 2009), additional pressure to 331 3431; fax: +1 41 331 8312. publish is exerted as a proportion of the allocated funding to universities 0260-6917/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.03.019 2 V. Ness et al. / Nurse Education Today 34 (2014) 1–5 is based on research outputs. In the UK, the assessment of the quality of produced one publication, but has gone on to collaborate on further research conducted by universities is judged against three criteria: re- publications and did not derive from working on a research project search output; research impact and the research environment. However, together, although this may be unique, Lee and Boud (2003) suggest the greatest weight is given to research output which relies heavily that there is no right way for successful writing. on publication in academic journals (REF, 2011). However it is recognised that there are a number of barriers to writing and pub- Forming the Group lishing, such as lack of time, workload issues, as well as fear and anxiety of failing (Steiniert et al., 2008; Rickard et al., 2009). As a In order to meet expectations for academics to publish we formed group of lecturers working within a large School of Health and Life a publication group with a difference. The difference being we were a Sciences we faced similar obstacles. The purpose of this article is to collaborative writing group with the aim of working together to start share our reflections of working as a collaborative writing group to suc- to write and develop articles which derived from and related to our cessfully circumvent such barriers. teaching practice. The group was initiated as the result of a “corridor conversation,” where as colleagues it was often our only chance to Literature Review “catch up” with each other. Two members of the group (LP & KD) were discussing the need to publish in order to facilitate career devel- There are a number of different ways to support writing and suc- opment. The difficulty of finding time to publish was raised and it was cessful publication. Keen (2007) categorises these as academic writing suggested that there may be others who were in a similar situation courses or workshops, writing groups and collaborative writing. and it may help to work as a team; utilising each other strengths to Writing courses have been popular, with academics such as Rowena achieve this aim. At the time we worked together delivering a third Murray developing these (Murray, 2001). Other academics have solely year pre-registration nursing module so the idea of developing a collab- used writing groups as a method to increase publications. These orative writing group was discussed at a module team meeting and according to Haas (2009) provide peer support and feedback on all members of the team (at total of 12 staff) were invited to consider writing. Grzybowski et al. (2003) evaluated the establishment of a joining such a group. At this point there was no discussion about how 3 year project with 10 physicians in a medical faculty in Canada. They the group would function as this would be dependent on the resultant found that through using writing groups 12 out of 50 articles discussed group size as well as the personal goals and interests of the members. during this time were published. The participants increased their publi- Three of the module team (LH, JMcC & VN) expressed an interest in cations as first authors from one to 10 publications over the three years joining the group. Thus the group was formed. As a group we were all that the research was carried out. Houfek et al. (2010) discussed the experienced academics; all had been involved in research studies and process of forming a writing group consisting of 7 nursing faculty had previously published with a total of 22 published articles between members from a College of Nursing in Nebraska who met for 1 h a 1998 and the formation of the group. These publications were in a week over the summer period of the academic year. During the first variety of journals, both national and international and covered a varie- 2 years of the writing group, there were 12 manuscripts submitted ty of themes including risk management, nurse education, mentorship, and 10 manuscripts revised/resubmitted and accepted for publication. research methods, clinical simulation, cardiac care and emergency Haas (2009) highlights that writing groups are usually writers meeting nursing. Some members have previously been on writing courses and regularly for mutual support while writing their own individual articles. completed individual publications through writing groups. As such, Such was the approach of Grzybowski et al. (2003) and Houfek et al. the group were not lacking in experience and as volunteers were (2010) writing groups. not lacking in motivation. As Feldman and Acord (2002) discusses the More frequently seen in the literature are papers describing com- competing demands on academics include a regular teaching schedule, bined writing courses or workshops and writing groups. Steiniert recruitment, supervision, marking and committee work. While lack of et al. (2008) in a paper reporting on the outcomes of 24 faculty mem- time appears to be a common barrier with Steiniert et al. (2008), bers within a Canadian medical faculty who participated in a half day Heinrich et al. (2009), Rickard et al. (2009) and Houfek et al. (2010) development workshop followed by a peer writing group found that, all identifying this obstacle. Although as individuals we were