Reviewed by: Writing for Academic Journals Steven E. Gump (bio) Rowena Murray. Writing for Academic Journals, 2nd ed. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press / McGraw-Hill Education, 2009. Pp. xiv, 220. Paper: ISBN-13 978-0-33-523458-5, UK£19.99, US$45.00. 'No one can know everything about academic writing,' Rowena Murray states in Writing for Academic Journals, and 'everyone learns something about it from doing it' (24). Are these the reasons why I continue to read—and review—books on writing for scholarly publication? Regardless, I am often pleased by the offerings I find, and Murray's work has much to praise. Murray, a reader and associate dean at the University of Strathclyde (in Glasgow, Scotland), has devoted much of her career to the facilitation and study of writing as a social act. This book represents a focused culmination of her research on writing and her experience as a coordinator of writing groups, workshops, and retreats. Writing to both new and experienced academic writers, she appeals to the inherent curiosity of academics by mobilizing a scholarly approach. Sources and examples illuminate the rhetorical, psychosocial, cognitive, and behavioural dimensions of writing, and her well-defended scope addresses writers across all disciplines. Even though 'writing for academic journals is widely perceived as one of the most discipline-specific activities' (8), Murray emphasizes the ubiquity of certain necessities of effective academic writing: defining the purpose; addressing the needs of the audience; organizing and signposting; substantiating claims; and bridging connections with ongoing disciplinary conversations in an appropriate rhetorical style, an approach she refers to as 'being rhetorical' (27, 131, 150). Indeed, these features are not limited to writing for scholarly journals; and, although her examples focus on such writing, many of the strategies Murray introduces would be equally effective for academics working on scholarly writing projects of any genre. [End Page 98] Writing strategies and suggestions are at the heart of this nine-chapter book, whose goal is to help readers develop their own 'integrated writing process[es]' (120). This reasonable view, suggesting that writing habits can evolve and that strategies can be combined to maximize efficiency and effectiveness, likely reflects the processes of the most productive scholarly writers. Offering a pair of memorable metaphors from writing scholar Robert Boice, Murray suggests that a mix of 'snack' and 'binge' writing can be appropriate. She details unmediated writing strategies, which include free writing, generative writing, and writing to prompts. She also describes mediated writing strategies, those involving consultation with writing partners, such as an activity described as a 'writing "sandwich"' (103–9). A chapter titled 'Dialogue and Feedback' focuses on writing groups and writing retreats, with descriptions of their benefits and suggestions for getting them started. Writers are encouraged to use reviewers' comments constructively and developmentally, finding time to take stock of what has been learned. Throughout, Murray is persuasive without being prescriptive. Speaking to sceptics by 'building critique into' her presentation (152), Murray advises with respect to several of her strategies, 'try it before you dismiss it' (99). In a chapter devoted to selecting journal venues, Murray suggests that aspiring authors become 'scholars' of their target journals. From an editor's perspective, the quickest (and easiest) manuscript rejections are often of submissions that make no effort to fit the scope, orientation, or rhetorical or editorial styles of a journal. Researching the journal—by looking through current and past issues, analysing content, reading editorial notes, and understanding and ultimately following the instructions for authors, for example—is not a new idea; but conceptualizing it as a scholarly activity may encourage some academics to give this important process greater attention. Since rhetorical modes and forms are temporal features (a point Murray brings up in a later chapter), writers must ensure that their works conform to the current standards or expectations of both their fields and their target journals. Murray's analyses of the content and language used in abstracts (54–60), with three examples from higher-education-related articles, model the type of activity I frequently recommend to non-native speakers of English. Murray knows that such activities can be of great use to everyone—especially academic writers who have not yet written...
Read full abstract
Jan 1, 2013
Vladimir Mihajlovic 
Open Access
