Reference Management Software: Mendeley

There are a lot of things to do in the academic wilderness, so let's make sure that we work smart and make use of the proper tools. Let's learn smart citations for this post.

Most students google the citation for a reference, then copy-paste it into their reference list. Then, type the in-text citations. 

Some do the supposedly smart thing of generating the citation from the journal webpage where they got the journal, then copy-paste it into their reference list. Then, type the in-text citations.

Those are actually somewhat smart, but not really.

Please make use of a citation tool. It will help make things convenient and leave you free to read, analyze, and write.

I personally use Mendeley citation software because it's free. Named after Dmitri Mendeleev, the software was created by three PhD students. The software was such a success that Elsevier brought the rights to it and further developed it. Beyond the issue of being purchased by a company, this software works with .ris, .bib, and .xml file types. These three file types are citation files that you can download from journals, which you can then import to Mendeley.

Let's go through the steps to get to know this program. 

The Software/s:

Note: I'm not adding most of the links because links might change. Just google search names of the software that I will mention. 

Go to www.mendeley.com. Create an account. Your citation data will be saved here, aside from the software. This lets you work wherever you are. Remember your password.

Download and install the Mendeley Reference Manager software. This is the main software. Once installed, you log in using your account. Your citation data will be synced here. 

The first optional add-on is Mendeley Desktop. This software is the old version, which I didn't initially like, but it has the capacity to make footnote citations. So, while we wait for Mendeley Reference Manager to update and have the power to make footnotes, make sure you have Mendeley Desktop if you do research that needs to have footnote citations.

You will also need the following add-ons. These two are a must. One is Mendeley Web Importer, and the other is Mendeley Cite for MS Word. If you want to use Mendeley Desktop, you will also have to get the MS Word Plugin. All these have download links at the TOOLS tab of your Mendeley Reference Manager and your Mendeley Desktop, so just go to the tools in each program and download and install the needed add-ons.

Note: Mendeley Web Importer is an extension of Chrome. Once added, make sure that you organize your extensions and place the Mendeley Importer Button on the Google Chrome bar.

Lastly, if you are willing to spend for convenience, purchase the Uploader for Mendeley for your Apple smartphone or tablet. It costs around 50-60 PHP. Super convenient. I'm not sure if there's a Google Play version, but as I searched, I think there's a different app, and it's free in Google Play. Please remember, Uploader for Mendeley is an OPTION. You don't need to buy it if you can't spare the amount for the purchase.

I'll further explain how to use them below; for now, here's a summary list of things to download and install.

1. Mendeley Referece Manager (Main Program)
2. Mendeley Web Importer (A Must)
3. Mendeley Cite (A Must)
4. Uploader for Mendeley (Optional)
5. Mendeley Desktop (Optional)

Getting citation data while on your computer

This is where you need Mendeley Web Importer. Make sure its installed on your Google Chrome. You then search for references on Google or Google Scholar or any high-quality and reputable journal databases such as Jstor, Taylor and Francis, and Sage. 

Once you have a certain chosen journal on display on Chrome, just click the Mendeley Web Importer Button. Just sign in if you still need to. Then, the citation data for that material will appear. You can double-check two sets of information:

First is the citation info for that article. Second is that Mendeley has searched the journal and has recommended related literature, you can check the ones that you think are relevant. Once everything is ok, then click "add." The data will then be synced to your Mendeley account and Mendeley Reference Manager.

Most automatic data are available if you are accessing a journal article from a reputable/high-quality publisher. If you are accessing books, news articles, or websites, then you will have to fill in some of the data.

Getting citation data while on a mobile device

Uploader for Mendeley is a useful tool for those who work on mobile devices it works just like the Web Mendeley Importer above, though it does not give related literature recommendations. Just open a journal article and click the share button on the Safari or Chrome browser bar. Check the info, then just click "save."

Managing citation data

Important things to note. Make sure that the data is complete. Remember that the machines help us, but they can't completely take over (yer :D ), so double-check the data before clicking "add" or "save."

You can always edit on your Mendeley Reference Manager or through your account by going to Mendeley.com and opening the library. The online library can also check for double entries. 

Using Mendeley on Word

If you are using Mendeley Desktop, you can make things easier by using alt+m, and it will open a reference search. So, start your sentence, then if you need a text citation, do alt+m then search the reference, select it, then press "ok" or "enter." For multiple references to cite, select and collect each on the search bar before pressing "ok" or "enter." 

In Mendeley Reference Manager, you have to click Mendeley Cite at the REFERENCES toolbar of MS Word, sign in, search for the reference, select it by checking it, and then click "insert citation." For multiple references to cite, just select those by checking each, then click "insert citation."

Thus far, these are the initial uses of Mendeley. Use it, and you'll find that you can do more, such as automatically shifting citation styles and editing in-text citations. See you next post. For now, I will take the winter vacation and maybe post again if inspiration or any need intrudes on a post.

Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=583634

Stealing Thunder

One of the reasons that I'm thankful for having had debate experience in college is that it helped me with reasoning and eventually helped me in writing my thesis and any class papers that I had in my years during my Master's and my Ph.D. There is a debate strategy called stealing one's thunder wherein you use your opponent's arguments against them or use their arguments or even evidence to help you win. It seems underhanded but quite valid. It's an advanced version of exploiting your enemy's weaknesses.

This, however, only translates directly into research writing. Remember, we discussed ethics last week. There's no enemy in research per se. But in research, you converse with the accomplishments of those who have come before you. This is a  mark of professionalism and of expertise. Being professional and an expert means that you know the body of literature surrounding the topic that you want to study (reviewing literature). They also mean that you know how to situate yourself and your idea among what ideas already exist (research gap). Lastly, professionalism and expertise imply that you know how to operate ideas in such a way that you can use them to argue a valid point (thesis statement).

Let's cover them today.

Practically a thesis means two things that both relate to each other. It means a valid argument that you can back up with evidence.  It is also a written manuscript containing the same argument with all the evidence and processes (methods) used to support your claim.

Take for example, scientific theses such as:

• Darwin's theory that species do change over time became the theory of evolution.
• Newton's that a force causes objects to be pulled to one another depending on their mass, which became the Law of Gravity.

In Political Science, there are:

• Michel stated that in every group, power will always form a pyramid, with the elite at the top. This became the Law of Oligarchy.
• Kant's was that Democracies do not start wars; non-democracies do. Hence if there's no non-democracy in the world, then there will be no one to start wars. This became the Principle of Perpetual Peace.

Some of those examples have already been tried and tested; they are laws and not theories any more. Those theories can still be tested, expanded, or improved.

This is where the conversation between the researcher and those who have made accomplishments comes in. That's why we review the literature. What has already been argued about our topic? Which is nearest to the topic? What are we doing regarding this?

When you have found the nearest or closest theory to your thesis, you can use this to frame your argument. It becomes the focal point of discussion. It will help frame your research questions, and it will help frame your thesis statement. This also provides a pathway to what needs to be conceptualized.

Extensions/Variations

When you test a theory, you either affirm if it is true or not in the particular location or population that you proposed. Take, for example, Darwin's theory of evolution. He made his observations in the Galapagos islands. Then, can you use the same methods of observation and check if the principle is the same in some islands in northern Europe? 

One of my preliminary lectures when I used to handle Political Science as a Profession was the story of Chris Wlezein, who proposed the theory of thermostatic response. That the voters are like thermostats. If you saturate them with one policy, they will choose the candidate from an opposing party in the next elections. Wlezein used this in the U.S. in a particular state but found that his formula needed to be revised in other states. The theory is faulty, so he went back to his drawing board and proposed the element of salience in the formula. Eventually, the formula did not work in any other location, making the theory stronger.  As a note. Just because there are lots of Democrat policies during this term doesn't mean that voters will thermostatically respond and vote Republican in the next election. But what makes this work is that if there are a lot of salient (noticeable) policies, then the thermostatic response can be activated. 

Going back, the story also tells us what happens when we test a theory, and it turns out to not work or be false in the location or population that we proposed; then, part of our professionalism and expertise is to extend the theory or provide a variation. Both terms are the same. I encountered extensions in British Parliamentary format debates. The closing teams extend the proposals of the opening teams.  In research, we provide an alternative theory, or we propose a variation to the theory by adding a new element to it that helps make it work or make it better in explaining the world around us.

As we close today, please check out the quote on our Magic: the Gathering card for the day. It reminds us of ethical practice in research and the practicalities of knowing the field of literature. I apologize for the late post. Tune in to the next post where we discuss the use of Mendeley citation tool.

Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?printed=false&multiverseid=51088

Research Ethics

The quote from our Magic: the Gathering card for today sounds satirical and tells more beyond what is said. Conducting ethical practice should, at the very least, be guided by principles as basic as the Golden Rule or the Law of Karma. For more rational people, actions have consequences, and today, we explore them regarding a research career. All researchers are expected to know ethical research practices, and I won't iterate those lessons, but I'll explore their practicalities.

Respect your resources.

A funded researcher had two research assistants. This researcher overlooked all the errors and laziness of one of the assistants, thus causing more burdens for the other assistant. Eventually, the other assistant stopped pointing out the errors of the lazy one since if he did, the researcher would just lump the task back to him. The project resulted in a manuscript that has just seen positive remarks from any journal. 

Funding is not the only research resource. Research requires several resources. Data, these come from our primary sources - the people whom we interview. For collection and management, this includes the research staff and even third-party consultants. Respect and politeness, or what Filipinos call delicadeza, will go a long way because most of the resources in the social sciences come from our social networks.

What about if you are just a student, without even any funding? You still need to treat your research with respect. And no matter the funding, you will also need to engage with different members of society to collect your data.

What's an ethics certification for?

An ethics certification is needed if you study vulnerable subjects. I.e. children, and marginalized people whose stories, when published, can touch on certain social sensitivities. Hence, you polish all aspects of ethical practice as mentioned in your methodology, then submit your manuscript for evaluation BEFORE data gathering. 

You can't be certified after data has already been collected.

You can only get published in a reputable journal if you have certification.

Refrain from blabbing about your stuff to everyone.

Your ideas are only really yours once you have made your stamp on them. That means you need to publish. The least you can do is present at an international professional conference. This is not a publication but tells the world you have declared this idea yours. So also make sure you have pored through all relevant literature to proudly say that your argument is yours. Other than that, if you keep blabbing about any researchable idea, some carrion feeder might be listening and stealing your idea and even end up publishing before you.

So, make sure that you conduct research ethically; karma will get you.

Tune in next week when we discuss the ethical strategy of branching from another person's ideas.

Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=602578

Perspectives

This entire post is riddled with perspectives. Get ready.

- - -

It was the pandemic, and I was shocked when an advocacy group wanted to hold a seminar promoting a particular cause to students, and the event was around four hours long. I was shocked and told them that audiences wouldn't have the attention span for four hours for such an activity. I was dumbfounded when I was aggressively told that if the audience wanted to advocate for that cause, then they would stay. 

- - -

A highly respected journal publishes research articles that are but a few pages long compared to the usual periodicals. The articles here have highly technical writing; only experts can read and understand them at first glance. The practice works because it was meant for a specific audience, and the journal's authority is highly sought.

- - -

All new faculty at my university receive employee orientation and some training. I always cherish an essential lesson from one of the speakers. In fact, I quoted this same luminary a post back. Dr. Allan De Guzman reminded us to know our place. Such a statement can sound rude in most conversations, but the way the esteemed professor delivered it was smooth and polite. It was good advice.

I recall seeing a meme yesterday commenting about how the world of education can foster an elevated sense of self such that one will tend to look down on others. This has relevance in research writing and publication because it is easy to get lost in this part of the academic wilderness.

The best way to keep one on the right path is to remember two perspectives.

1. Your perspective as a writer.
2. The perspective of your would-be reader.

You need to remember the first perspective to ensure that you keep the argument ppr advocacy that you are trying to relay.

You have to enforce the second perspective to deliver your message clearly.

- - -

Why you can't proofread your own work?

You can proofread your work to ensure that what you are trying to say is in the text. You proofread to make sure you remembered something.

But you always need someone else to reread your work because there are mistakes that we commit simply because we do not know that what we did was wrong. So, swallow that pride and let someone else who knows more look at your work and let them comment most harshly. Be thankful that they beat your work up because now, you can correct it.

Jargon and digestibility 

Jargon is words that have technical uses in different academic programs. They are the language of the discipline where you belong or where you are trying to prove that you belong (i.e., if you are a would-be Bachelor, Master, or Doctor). The use of specific keywords shows that you and your work are acceptable. There's something worth remembering here, too.

Use the jargon; don't just put it on the manuscript.

That means that as you write, the jargon appears, but your subsequent statements also show that you understand what it is. 

Sometimes, you must also include an explanatory statement to help readers understand the jargon. This is because there will be interested people who may want to read your work, yet they may need to be more experts in the niche that you have written on. You don't need a definition of terms, but you can find ways to converse with your reader and add explanations without intruding on the text. How you strategize this also shows other experts that you understand what you are saying. This, in particular, is necessary for those trying to defend a proposal. Whan you forget to put the rest of perspective in your writing, your panel will tend to get lost in what you write, they will get pissed, and they will add unnecessary suggestions because you did not clearly convey what yu needed to deliver.

Remember, not everyone shares our own vision of the same thing, just as the quote says on our Magic: The Gathering card for today.

Tune in next week when we talk about ethics.

(Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=73927)

Why are you doing this?

Metrobank Foundation recognized Teacher of the Year - Dr. Allan De Guzman has a principle that "when the why is clear, the how is easy." 

It's important to remember when navigating the academic wilderness, especially when you have already entered the writing phase - be it a term paper or your opus of a thesis or dissertation.

Papers for one. These come in many forms: term paper, weekly paper, weekly response, and issue paper. They are often used as major grading outputs. Hence, hitting the mark when writing something like this is crucial. Again - know why you are here, and as a corollary, why are you writing this.

Several students fail or get low grades on a paper simply because the professor has already laid out the goals for that writing assignment, and the student just writes anything on that topic. Sloppy.

For today, let's put the perspective of writing a thesis or a dissertation and go through some general points to answer the question Why are you doing this?

To graduate

You may not graduate if this is your only purpose. Of course, all students intend to graduate. But for now, we are at a phase of writing your great work/accomplishment, which serves as proof that you do merit (not I did not say deserve) to graduate. This is one of the reasons why a certain school task can be tedious, boring, irritating, or simply difficult to do. It;s because the student may have entered a perspective that divorces the task from the goal of graduation. The next two are better general perspectives.

To advocate

Particularly within the social sciences and humanities, advocacy is part of life. Something that we fight for. When you write to advocate, the data you produce can help push forward the advocacy. Take, for example, me; I advocate for the environment and for the welfare and rights of LGBT. 

An essential caution is that advocacy can be biased, preachy, or both. In addressing this, first, resolve if your paper is intended to be normative or scientific. Scientific papers require freedom from biases, though they can get preachy. 

Also, make sure you detail any steps you take in your methods to make your data as unbiased as possible. 

And, of course, tone down the preaching. Get off the high horse, get off the podium/pedestal, and talk to your reader instead of giving them a sermon.

To argue

Of course, we argue when we advocate. Still, I distinguish this from the previous section by pointing out that in this perspective, we argue because we are trying to establish newly discovered information or fact and prove its veracity.

For example, St. Thomas argued that there is a God. This saint also argued that theft is sometimes allowable. Charles Darwin argued that living beings evolved and were not created in the way the Bible says. Galileo and his peers also argued that the Earth revolves around the sun as opposed to the reverse argument.

Remembering that you are trying to prove undiscovered or unrecognized information will structure your thinking and research attitude to sequence, organize, and logically prove your argument. Instead of simply wanting to graduate, you may pick convenient methods and data that are not the right ones to fit the job.

Below is a simple quote from today's Magic: The Gathering card. Tune in next week when we further talk about perspectives in writing.

(Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=595142)

Jack of All Trades, Master of One, or Master of None

Of Hares and Brains

One of my inspirations for graduate studies is the Numb3rs TV series. Each episode explores practical uses of mathematical and theoretical ideas. More so, how the main character explained theory through analogy is an excellent way of translating academic jargon into layman's explanation. Their episode on AI (see IMDB info here), which aired in March more than a decade ago, says that there are circumstances where we can only really multitask or, to be more precise, spread our attention in an arc. 

The example in the series was about a scientist who was working on both AI and Cybernetics. Yes, both disciplines may seem at first glance to belong under one umbrella, but each of these disciplines requires opposite modes of thinking. To pursue both hares is like spending research resources such as time, money, and even mechanical usage of computers in a scatterbrained manner. In a way, this behavior is a perfect example of the expression "harebrained." It implies making foolish or flighty plans. 

Academia and Profession

Political Science is one of those disciplines that is categorized under the category of "Jack-of-All-Trades, Master of None." There are numerous sub-disciplines within the field and also several career options. The need for specialization for an initiative from such a discipline can spell potential danger when already exploring a place within the professional world. Not everyone is blessed with a clear-cut path when they enter higher education; however, specialization or having a space where one belongs in the future should be something worth thinking about when choosing any of the following:

1. A college or post-graduate degree
2. The thesis to write
3. The electives to choose

I first bulleted the above list and then decided to sequence it in numbers because they have a relevant sequence. In particular, numbers 3 and 4. There are required courses and elective courses, sometimes called cognates. Whether called elective or cognate, we get to choose which path we should take given a particular budget of units. This choice is crucial because the courses we take will help shape the thesis that we write. Thus, we don't need a clear-cut thesis argument or proposal by the time we have to make our elective choices, but at least have a general topic where we would like to situate our place in the future.

The Bachelor, the Master, the Doctor

To say that one is a bachelor of a particular field of study, i.e., arts or sciences, means that one has had ample preparation to become familiar with all the needed knowledgein that specific field. The proof of this is usually the college degree thesis. These researches generally explore the field and the writing, which shows the gatekeepers of the discipline (the panel) that the student does have enough study to merit becoming a bachelor. Masters engage a specific theory. Their research supports or contradicts a particular existing theory based on scientific research. Doctors propose their own theories and sometimes even set out to establish a new law. That's why these individuals are considered scientists.

The above configurations are basic. Some institutions have unique ways of approaching these. Sometimes, college students are required to prove or disprove a theory. Sometimes, masters are already expected to propose their own theories. What's common, however, in this basic configuration is that there's a trajectory in the linear process from one to the next. These are steps toward proving that one has a degree of adeptness in a particular topic or field.

Trajectories and Tangents

As I end today's post, I want to iterate. There are structural ways to help discipline oneself. If not, then at least plot a course toward a direction while living in the wilderness of higher education.  

First is the linear and future thinking perspective mentioned above. Another is to avoid the pitfall of tangents. Going on a tangent means taking a path not within one's trajectory. We can encounter these when we find something interesting in the academic wilderness, and we can get pulled by social factors, i.e., bandwagoning, peer pressure, fanboy/fangirling towards a particular topic, course, book, teaching, or professor's ideas. When this happens, be sure to take note of your academic progress. Is it better to shift plans? Are you abandoning resources that you've already accumulated? Sometimes making a jump is better, sometimes it's just being harebrained.

For our Magic: The Gathering card, check out the quote on the sphinx below. Don't let yourself get distracted.

P.S. Tune in next week where we talk about what the heck you are doing in this academic wilderness.

(Image Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=479048)

Where to begin (writing a research proposal)

Elementary

Let's first familiarize ourselves with the components of IMRAD.

I - Introduction

M - Method

RAD - Results and Discussion

These are the basic components of publishable research. 

There are, of course, unmentioned parts.

It ends with a Conclusion, and the entire set is preceded by an Abstract.

The introduction contains it the following important elements:

• The Hook, the opening part of the introduction, should catch the reader's attention and make them want to continue reading.
• Strategies include a puzzling question, a quote, or a description of an interesting event.
• Backgrounder - I use this wording instead of Background because not all submission formats use this as a heading. However, the content remains important. This informs the reader of information that they need to better understand what you are talking about
• An excellent example is my own dissertation experience. My topic is very interdisciplinary. It includes media and social science because I'm studying Boys Love on TV. So, we can only expect the media experts to know a little of the social sciences part and vice versa. More so, expect that only some of your readers will fully know your topic. This section bridges that issue.
• The problem statement group. I say group because there's a unique relationship among them. This group comprises the Literature review, Research question, and Framework.

For the sake of completeness, I'm mentioning that Methods can have its own subheadings depending on the complexity of the research. In particular, an Ethics Declaration should be declared if the research can touch on a sensitive subject of study.

Praxis

The above lists a sequential order of layout for publishable material. It does not mean that it was produced in the same sequence. Let's trace the actual process of how it is done.

1. Gather and familiarize with literature.
• I also collate the details of my pieces of literature onto an organized spreadsheet, but that's my personal strategy.
2. Compose the framework and problem statement.
3. Write the backgrounder.
4. Write the Literature Review.
5. Write your Method.

This sequence ensures that you have a certain degree of expertise within the field that you are studying. Part of this is your knowledge of the existing literature. Who are the currently published people who say something on the topic? Are their articles engaging each other? Complementing? Debating? Extending? 

A good illustration is attending a high-end gala. It would be weird if you did not know who the movers and shakers were in the event. 

It's the same thing with a proposal. How is it that you are proposing, yet you only have the basics? You need to know what's being discussed in the community.

If you have this, it proves in the proposal that you are ready to undertake your mission to prove your own thesis/dissertation (which is a synonym for argument).

As I say good luck to any of my readers, I also include this day's relevant Magic: the Gathering card. Just check out the quote (flavor text).

(Source: https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=414344)

The structural cycle of scientific knowledge

Allegories of Knowledge

Aes Sedai (trans from the Old Tongue = Servants of All) were wielders of supernatural power (the One Power) in Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time novels. These people also learned to master political power and the power that comes from knowledge. The most potent aes sedai were those who lived during the Age of Legends when wonders were made through the use of One Power.

I once had the pleasure of reading an essay in the theories section of the now-defunct WoTmania website on how aes sedai, whose residence happened to be the White Tower, was an allegory for academia. The White Tower is the proverbial Ivory Tower. Aes Sedai is classified into three ranks: the Novices who are expected to learn rotes; the Accepted who can choose whichever field of study to focus on; and the Aes Sedai themselves, who then choose a field where they can be members of a specialized group (ajah). A novice receives a ring upon being raised to the accepted rank; an accepted gains a shawl with the color of her chosen Ajah. 

In real life, students in basic education are expected to learn rotes, the basic skills and founding elements of a particular set of knowledge. Those in higher education, upon graduation, receive a colored hood representing the faculty or college where they gained their degree. They can also opt for a ring.

I was in college when a professor of mine defined a university as a community of scholars. I learned through the years that scholasticism is not simply learning from lessons or readings. Rather, it is also the act of discovering knowledge. A university is composed of people who strive to discover knowledge through research.

There's a dark story in The Wheel of Time when an aes sedai named Saine Tarasind applied to the board of one of the greatest universities in the Age of Legends, and the board evaluated her as unsuited for research. She was instead given the chance to teach. This grated at her as she found herself leading the discoveries of others instead of conducting her own discoveries. 

Who would have thought how research would become such a politically economic item at present in the actual world?

Academic Socio-Political Capital

It is fitting that universities are upgrading minimum hiring requirements to having at least a master's or a doctorate degree before accepting a new faculty. Now, there's also the element of research. Complimenting research is a person's quality of having publication in journals.

Journals are becoming the repositories of scientific knowledge. Their peer-reviewed character, aim, and scope imply a person's academic frame. Having more publications in a particular field means expertise.

Capitalist Cycles

The process of publishing requires resources and expenses.  Journals need to sell their issues. A journal can be subscribed to, or its articles can be brought piece by piece depending on a purchaser's budget. Schools make an institutional subscription to allow their scholars access to these valuable tomes. 

Competition within the academic profession led to the slogan "publish or perish." Some can have actual institutional implications of perish. Those who do not publish may kiss the path to tenure goodbye. Or, not publishing implies a lack of expertise as opposed to those who do publish and are then read and cited within the field. I support the hypothesis that this need gave birth to predatory journals and their latter cousins - predatory conferences. Certain groups establish online publications, offering easy chances to get published AT A FEE. Some conferences bait young academicians by adding "opportunity to publish" as part of the benefits of joining the conference. This needs clarification. Some conferences do create a publication pathway at a legitimate quality journal. However, the publications in predatory conferences are publishing your manuscript as part of the conference proceedings. Conference proceedings are not bad per se,; they are not scientific journals. It does not mean that one's written ideas have been screened and accepted by peers (through blind peer review) from the same field of study.

Accompanying the need to publish is citing the right materials for your manuscript. I attended a webinar on citing sources and getting published during the pandemic. The speaker directed the participants' attention to journal rankings, impact factors, and number of citations. One should use those who are well cited, those with high impact, to bolster the publication chances of one's manuscript. This is one of the capitalist economic cycles. Those with citations continually get cited by journals because of this campaign.  

A different slogan has also circulated; I encountered this as memes in social media. These questioned the capitalist block to the availability of scientific knowledge. Not all journals are subscribed to by universities. Not all researchers, whether students or professionals, can access every journal. The need to access information from books or journals led to the birth of websites where digital books and journals can be downloaded for free. Not all articles are, however, available even in these Robin Hood systems of websites that open up access to information. Articles and books that are well read have had the need to be cited, are in reputable and peer-reviewed journal publishers are those that can be accessed on these websites. Manuscripts in predatory journals are, of course, open access. The fee has been paid by the author, to begin with. This is the second, much more complex cycle. Less ranked journals, academic local journals, however peer-reviewed, are often open access. Those accessible for a fee may be unavailable on the Robin Hood sites. The currency is the popularity of the article. Authors and institutions strive to have publications in high-ranked journals. The higher the rank, the higher the possibility that this is a pay-to-access site. The higher the rank, the higher the opportunity that a copy will appear on Robin Hood sites. 

Externalities to note here are that more popular journals will have higher chances of institutional subscriptions. Hence, more students and professionals will have access to their manuscripts. The act of being downloaded from an official site is sometimes counted. This can diminish when students pass around a reading among them. Sometimes, a study group will have one tasked to get files. Sometimes, mentors and mentees pass down files from generation to generation. Authors accepted through blind peer review at reputable journals can also opt for Gold publication. The manuscript will be open access because the author has already paid the publication expense. This is possible, especially if the research ha been funded through a grant and thus has funds.

The Essence of Elegance

More often, the brilliance of an idea is not in its content but in how it is said. This doesn't mean though that we should prioritize glitz over content, but that we need to express our ideas in a clear and event elegant manner.

But what is elegance?

I encountered the concept when I was watching Hardball the 8th episode of Numb3rs season 3. The mathematician encountered a guy who does baseball betting and who had a formula for doing his baseball statistics. The guy's formula was considered "elegant."

Elegance is your capacity to convey your message loud and clear without having to shout.

It's a paradox.

I used to be in debate and I always would bring home the best speaker award, I had eloquence in speaking - the verbal version for elegance. Sometimes though, one may be eloquent in speaking but not elegant in writing.

I learned that the hard way when I handed my first manuscript for publication to an editor friend of mine. The draft was not a rough draft, it was a tough draft and gave her a headache. We learn from those mistakes and try to learn in such a way as to be able to compose our thoughts into publishable material.

There's also a set of concepts on elegance that we can come to know so that we can give them particular attention when we are writing.

Writing is not about the length of pages and the number of words per see. Journals have maximum word counts since they need to be able to budget the space of the issue to be published. Minimums exist, though, because of the expected substance that a manuscript should have. Take for example in debate. Our Grand Chancellor during our first lesson explained that the 7 minutes is a standard because anything less than 7 will not have have been explained well and not substantiated enough. Anything beyond 7 is already boring and tedious.

Journals in some way have the same line of thought. The minimum in journals ranges from around 6 thousand to 8 thousand words. Somewhat give or take a thousand from the magic 7. But just because we have the minimum, it doesn't mean to say that we simply write to meet it. Personally, I also consider that just because we have a lot to say means that we have an excuse to go beyond the maximum. We strategize, that's the reason we outline, that's the reason we do concept mapping and create frameworks. It helps us determine what to include and what not to include.

The same also applies to frameworks or any diagram that we use. We have to ask ourselves, does the image help or does it merely repeat what you are already writing? 

Notice how even if we're talking about the clarity of what we say, I keep on entwining it with the substance of what our message is? Both go hand in hand together. Since you don't want to give boredom and tedium to your reader, you try to make sure that what you put into what you write is just the relevant information needed to make your point. There's also a corollary to this principle, did you give enough information or did you skip a particular line of thought? This can happen when our minds assume that the information we are talking about is something that everyone should be aware of. Trust me, not everyone does. This is dangerous for thesis students and for those who are trying to publish. We assume that our professors, our panel of evaluators, and our peer reviewers know everything there is under the sun on that topic. Well, journals do try to do their best. But here's a situation, just as your mind can get lost in the idea that a part of your topic is common knowledge, then other people's minds can also get trapped in their own particular fields of pieces of knowledge and interests. That's the reason why reviewer 2 or panel 2 tries to give so many other suggestions that are irrelevant to what you are writing about. That is why sometimes, they say that they can't make sense of what you wrote.

So, the answer is, make sure that you are making the reader make sense of what you wrote. Write in such a way as to guide the reader toward your point. Guide in such a way that you lead the reader as if you are a tour guide and you are helping them identify things in the wilderness (pages, and probably lots of it) that is your manuscript. Lastly, write in such a way that the way you talk through ink and paper is pleasant to read. 

The March Towards Q.E. Week 12

  Check-up:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  CONTINUING
2. Read and write response for Aram Hur - Naratives of Civic Duty DONE
3. Read and do notes for David Grusky Social Stratification DONE
4. Read and do notes for Hsiao - East Asian Middle Classes DONE
5. Read and do notes for Leach - Political Systems of Highland Burma DONE
6. Read and do notes for Castells - The Rise of the Network Society DONE
7. Read and do notes for Harvey - The Condition of Post Modernity DONE
8. Read Swidler - Culture in Action DONE
9. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
10. Attend to A Different View.  
11. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

Objectives for next week:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  
2. Read and write response for Su - Collective Killings in Rural China
3. Read Owens, Su, and Snow - Social scientific inquiry into genocide and mass killing: From unitary outcome to complex processes
4. Read and do notes for Archer - Culture and Agency
5. Read and do notes for Griswold A Methodological Approach for the Sociology of Culture
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
7. Attend to A Different View.  
8. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 11

 Check-up:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  CONTINUING
2. Read Beth Roy - Some Trouble with Cows and write a response DONE
3. Read Phillip Clart - Religion in Modern Taiwan DONE
4. Read Mircea Eliade - Patterns in Comparative Religion DONE
5. Read David Jordan - Gods, Ghosts, and Ancestors DONE
6. Read Herman and Chomsky - Manufacturing Consent
7. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum). DONE  
8. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
9. Rewatch old BLs related to study.  DONE

Objectives for next week:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  
2. Read and write response for Aram Hur - Naratives of Civic Duty
3. Read and do notes for David Grusky Social Stratification
4. Read and do notes for Hsiao - East Asian Middle Classes
5. Read and do notes for Leach - Political Systems of Highland Burma
6. Read and do notes for Castells - The Rise of the Network Society
7. Read and do notes for Harvey - The Condition of Post Modernity
8. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
9. Attend to A Different View.  
10. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 10

Check-up:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  CONTINUING
2. Read Sahlins - Culture and Preactical Reason DONE
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and Write Response DONE.
4. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum). DONE 
5. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
6. Rewatch old BLs related to study. DONE

Objectives for next week:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  
2. Read Beth Roy - Some Trouble with Cows and write a response 
3. Read Phillip Clart - Religion in Modern Taiwan
4. Read Mircea Eliade - Patterns in Comparative Religion
5. Read David Jordan - Gods, Ghosts, and Ancestors
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
7. Attend to A Different View.  
8. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 8

    Check-up:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  CONTINUING
2. Read Malinowski - Argonauts of the Western Pacific DONE
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and Write Response. DONE
4. Write Finals Paper for Political Sociology DONE
5. Write Research Note from Political Sociology Paper for submission to ADV. DONE
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  DONE
7. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
8. Rewatch old BLs related to study. DONE

I received no replies from the Dept of Lit professors. I'm planing to reach out to them in person but I've also checked out professors at the Dept of Communications.

Objectives for next week:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought 
2. Read Sahlins - Culture and Preactical Reason
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and Write Response.
4. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
5. Attend to A Different View.  
6. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 7

   Check-up:

1. Reminder, send LGBT readings list to Dr. Holm after the holidays. DONE
2. Reminder, email the profs in Literature after the holidays. DONE
3. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought  CONTINUING
4. Revise paper for the book chapter. DONE
5. Write finals paper on pol soc. Remember to focus on the anbstract. CONTINUING
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  DONE
7. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
8. Rewatch old BLs related to study. DONE 

I received no replies from the Dept of Lit professors. I'm planing to reach out to them in person but I've also checked out professors at the Dept of Communications.

Objectives for next week:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought 
2. Read Malinowski - Argonauts of the Western Pacific
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and Write Response.
4. Write Finals Paper for Political Sociology
5. Write Research Note from Political Sociology Paper for submission to ADV.
6. Write finals paper on pol soc. Remember to focus on the anbstract.
7. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
8. Attend to A Different View.  
9. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 6

  Check-up:

1. Update Dr. Work on Dissertation Plans` DONE
2. Follow-up w Dr. Tsai re: Examiners DONE
3. Follow-up w Dean and Dr. Wei re: committee membership DONE
4. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought CONTINUING 
5. Read Kalyvas "Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe" and write a response.  DONE
6. Read Russell "Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches" DONE
7. Read Reagin and Beccker "What Is a Case?" DONE
8. Read Burawoy - The Extended Case Method ADDED AND DONE
9. Read Liberson - Making it Count ADDED AND DONE
10. Read Douglas - Natural Symbols ADDED AND DONE
11. Input new QE sources to Mendeley. DONE
12. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  DONE
13. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
14. Rewatch old BLs related to study DONE. 

I've met with Dr. Wei and secured her as a member of my dissertation committee. However, my meeting with Dr. Work revealed that our research interests, however, that we're both interested, do not complement our niches. Hence, I've searched for one at the Dept of Chinese Literature and at the Graduate Institute of Chinese Literature. Both yielded good results. The former has a full professor who does literary anthro -Dr. Li Feng-Kao, she can be the third committee member. The latter has Dr. Ta Wei-Chi, who specializes in LGBT literature, I believe he is the best choice for an adviser.

Since it's a holiday here this week, I will defer meeting them to next week. For this week, I'll finalize my final paper for Political Sociology and also do my revisions for the book chapter.

Objectives for next week:

1. Reminder, send LGBT readings list to Dr. Holm after the holidays.
2. Reminder, email the profs in Literature after the holidays.
3. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought 
4. Revise paper for the book chapter.
5. Write finals paper on pol soc. Remember to focus on the anbstract.
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
7. Attend to A Different View.  
8. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 5

 Check-up:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought - CONTINUING
2. Read Gorsky and Perry "The Flag and Cross" and write a response. - DONE
3. Read Alford, The Craft of Inquiry.  - DONE
4. Input new QE sources to Mendeley. - DONE
5. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  - DONE
6. Attend to A Different View.  - DONE
7. Rewatch old BLs related to study. - DONE

Objectives for next week:

1. Upodate Dr. Work on Dissertation Plans`
2. Follow-up w Dr. Tsai re: Examiners
3. Follow-up w Dean and Dr. Wei re: committee membership
4. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought 
5. Read Kalyvas "Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe" and write a response. 
6. Read Russell "Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches"
7. Read Reagin and Beccker "What Is a Case?"
8. Input new QE sources to Mendeley.
9. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  
10. Attend to A Different View.  
11. Rewatch old BLs related to study. 

The march towards Q.E. Week 4

Check-up:

1. MEET WITH DR WORK Wed (March 8) 2:00 p.m. (DONE)
2. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought (Continuing)
3. Read Gorsky and Perry "The Flag and Cross" and write a response. (Response to be written)
4. Attend the two sit-in classes. (DONE)
5. Read Weber, Economy and Society. (DONE)
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum).  (DONE)
7. Attend to A Different View.  (DONE)
8. Play Marvel Snap and watch BL. (DONE).

I had the meeting with my intended adviser. I have to narrow down the topic and make sure it's worth writing and doable. Fatima and her mom were able to help, topic is now  focused on the myth itself.

Nuace, I'm now proscribed from watching any new BL so as to avoid contamination.

This weeks objectives:

1. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought
2. Read Gorsky and Perry "The Flag and Cross" and write a response.
3. Read Alford, The Craft of Inquiry.
4. Input new QE sources to Mendeley.
5. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum). 
6. Attend to A Different View. 
7. Rewatch old BLs related to study.

The march towards Q.E. Week 3

 Checking on last weeks objectives:

1. Read Scott's "Seeing Like A State" and write a response. DONE
2. Attend the two sit-in classes. REPLACED WITH CONFERENCE
3. Schedule meeting with Dr. Work. DONE meeting scheduled to this coming Wednesday.
4. Read Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought (as much thinkers than can be had in a week) DONE
5. Attend to internationalization duties. DONE 
6. Attend to A Different View.  DONE
7. Play Marvel Snap and watch BL. DONE

For this week's objectives:

1. MEET WITH DR WORK Wed (March 8) 2:00 p.m.
2. Do notes for Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought
3. Read Gorsky and Perry "The Flag and Cross" and write a response.
4. Attend the two sit-in classes.
5. Read Weber, Economy and Society.
6. Attend to internationalization duties (including NCCU-UST Forum). 
7. Attend to A Different View. 
8. Play Marvel Snap and watch BL.

The march towards Q.E. Week 2 2/2

I had this list last Monday which needs checking on.

1. Read Barth's "Balinese World" DONE
2. Read Rappaport's "Ritual and Religion" DONE
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and organize study group. DONE
4. Write the paper for Political Sociology DONE
5. Attend to internationalization duties. DONE
6. Attend to A Different View. DONE
7. Review that article at the journal... DONE
8. Play HL and watch BL!  DONE

I had the chance also to read Giddens "Capitalism and Modern Social Theory," and sat-in at Dr. Work's and Dr. Deasy's class. I plan to schedule a meeting with Dr. Work regarding finally proposing to her as my dissertation advisor. We had a nice chat this week on my writing style and I do belive it will be a good decision to practice with her.

For next week, the To Do List is:

1. Read Scott's "Seeing Like A State" and write a response.
2. Attend the two sit-in classes.
3. Schedule meeting with Dr. Work.
4. Read Swingewood A Short History of Sociological Thought (as much thinkers than can be had in a week)
5. Attend to internationalization duties. 
6. Attend to A Different View. 
7. Play Marvel Snap and watch BL.

The march towards Q.E. Week 2 1/2

I've already begun with qualifying exam readings while balancing them with my final academic course this sem. Both of these are further balanced by watching BL and playing Hogwarts Legacy.

One of my former RAs, Paul, helped me complete the set of documents during the weekend.

It was also that weekend when I was feeling the jitters. Got lots of readings and a life-changing exam in the end. But I looked at the books and told myself, I've read Wheel of Time, you're nothing.

Hence, I've begun James Scott's "The Art of Not Being Governed" and Ann Swidler's "Culture in Action."

As usual, not easy to digest at the start, but I found what I'm looking for and noted all ideas and pages.

This week, the plan is:

1. Read Barth's "Balinese World"
2. Read Rappaport's "Ritual and Religion"
3. Read Political Sociology Readings and organize study group.
4. Write the paper for Political Sociology
5. Attend to internationalization duties.
6. Attend to A Different View.
7. Review that article at the journal...
8. Play HL and watch BL! 

The march towards Q.E. Week 1 1/1

I'll be taking the Qualifying Exam on the last Friday of March of this year. It's the exam which when passed will raise me from Ph.D. Student to Ph.D. Candidate. I feel like an Accepted of the White Tower about to take the test of the Hundred Weaves. 

It's now the first week of the Spring semester and I decided to journal my progress in preparation. Few among the IDAS (Internationa Doctoral Students in Asia Pacific Studies) students take the track that I chose, hence little few people to be study buddies.

I dedicated this week by:

• Searching for the readings list documents.
• Inputting their citations into Mendeley.
• Securing them into my GDrive and organizing them into an IBooks Collections folder.

I've also reached out to senior Society and Culture track IDAS students for the four that I still couldn't find.

I also should visit the IDAS Director for advice to check with this semester's examiner.

I'll begin next week with a checklist which I will close by checking every Friday.

The harvest for now is good. Readings begin tomorrow.

Valar morghulis,