If you’re struggling to avoid plagiarism, you must know how to paraphrase in your writing.
According to ThoughtCo.com, a paraphrase is a “restatement of a text in another for or other words, often simplify or clarify meaning”. Paraphrasing can be simply defined as an attempt to rewriting other opinion in your own words. We can use paraphrasing as a way of demonstrating critical thinking skills and developing shared understanding.
Here is an example of paraphrase:
“Differentiation as an instructional approach promotes a balance between a student’s style and a student’s ability. Differentiated instruction provides the student with options for processing and internalizing the content, and for constructing new learning in order to progress academically”
“Teachers use differentiated instruction to help students learn, allowing the teacher to cater lessons to the way each student learns and each student’s skill (Thompson, 2009).”
We have three useful strategies to help you create a satisfactory paraphrase.
- Immerse yourself in the text
Read the paragraph several times and quickly review the important points and key statements. Close the cited book or article and make notes, if necessary.
- Change words and sentence structure
When you paraphrase, you can’t simply replace a few words. To paraphrase a source, you can emphasize your interpretation by rewording and rewriting phrases and sentences without changing the meaning from the original text. You can also use thesaurus to find synonyms and other similar terms.
A paraphrase must be cited by attributing to the original source. Signaling terms (e.g., “they write”, “Smith notes that…” “He believes that…”) lets the reader know that you are introducing a source and where the paraphrase starts.
A Guide to Paraphrasing in Research Paper. Retrieved from: https://wordvice.com/a-guide-to-paraphrasing-in-research-papers-apa-ama/
Paraphrase. Retrieved from: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-paraphrase-1691573
Using Evidence: Examples of Paraphrasing. Retrieved from: https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/paraphrase/examples
Novelty of the research refers to one or elements that are new in the research, including new methodology or new observation which leads to a new knowledge discovery. A novelty might contribute to scientific progress, as stated by the Philosopher, Imre Lakatos, that good research programs are “progressive”. The novelty of the research and research impact can be a strategic way to engage the attention of the readers in a research paper. The essence of novelty of the obtained results of the research needs to be connected with their importance for science as well as with practical importance. For finding novelty in area of research, researchers need to conduct a thorough literature review to find out what is studied and what are the gaps which need to be clarified. This literature review depend on in-depth knowledge of the field. Researchers should compare and link their work with other previous research. Many high impact journals will tend to prioritize choosing to publish novel articles. With a large amount of research and rapid scientific development, it becomes a challenge and pressure for some researchers to produce innovative and relevant research.
Cohen, B.A. (2017). How Should Novelty be Valued in Science?. [ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]
What is novelty in Research. [editage.com]
Submitted articles in high-quality scholarly journals can be rejected for many reasons. A large number of papers get rejected solely on the basis of their writing or without being reviewed any further. Every researcher experiences rejection at all stages of their careers. Studies have shown that around 21% are rejected without review, and approximately 40% of papers are rejected after peer review. In such cases, every authors need to figure out number of options on what to do when their papers are rejected.
- Give yourself time and face it with a clear mind and proper analysis
- Provide the submission details and learn all the details of reviewer comments
- Asking Editor to reconsider with good reasons and arguments
- Revise, rewritten and (re)submit to same or another journal that fits your work
- Do a series of improvements for your articles
- Ask advice to a more experienced researcher who has published more than you
- Editors, like all humans, make mistakes
- Try again and do some research works
Having a paper rejected can be frustrating and make you unhappy, but you still have a chance to turn this condition into your advantage. Your work is likely not as terrible or flawed as you think it is and editors often make the wrong decision. Enjoy and good luck for publishing your research and get some more experience!
Applied the APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY approach (POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY FOR CHANGE APPROACH) to the learning process, Research Synergy Institute collaborate with UNISBA to held UNISBA Scientific and Academic Writing Coaching. The approach consists of five stages/phase: Define, Discovery, Dream, Design, and Destiny (Coperider et al.) The program started by:
H-14 workshop day: Participants must submit a draft paper
H-3 workshop day: All participants received four documents from scientific review process consist of Content Review, Language review, similarity score, and journal recommendation.
In the day of the workshop, participants have started the DEFINE and DISCOVERY phase through their content review, language review, similarity score, and journal recommendation result. From the results of the scientific review, participants did DISCOVERY what they had done and which the best part.
By the journal recommendation, participants started the DREAM phase where they CLEARLY known the purpose of the journal to be targeted. By this stage, participants can explore various published articles and analysis comparing the articles that have been made into detailed improvement steps. In this phase, participants experienced the DESIGN PHASE.
These steps give participants a TIME FRAME which is an action plan written by each participant called DESTINY PHASE.
Through this approach, facilitator empowered the lecturers to masterly meet government requirements in scientific writing standards and publications.
This approach was designed by the Research Synergy Institute (Support system of the Research Synergy Foundation) as Innovation and alternative to various scientific writing improvement programs for lecturers.
All scholarly journals go through the peer-review process as the screening and evaluation work to ensure the quality of a research paper. Peer-review is a key part of the academic publishing process. Papers should be published according to the merit of their scientific contribution. A Review process will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. Typically reviewers are invited to conduct a review by a journal editor. Editors usually select qualified experts or researchers that are experts in the same subject area as the paper. Reviewing is a process that every researcher should contribute to.
Reviewers evaluate article submissions to journals based on the requirements of that journal, predefined criteria, and the quality, completeness and accuracy of the research presented. They provide feedback on the paper, suggest improvements and make a recommendation to the editor about whether to accept, reject or request changes to the article. The ultimate decision always rests with the editor but reviewers play a significant role in determining the outcome.
Although reviewing requires the investment of time and an expertise test, there are great benefits if you choose to become a reviewer:
- Reviewing other papers in your field is a critical thinking process that may provide new insights about your own work.
- Establish your expertise in the field and expand your knowledge
- Reviewing papers also helps a researcher to know other’s research work much earlier
- A reviewer can establish his/her profile in the manuscript system and build a professional relationship with the editors
- Performing a review can be a part of a promotion portfolio of your academic career. It is a part of an essential role for researchers.
Many people in science community enjoy serving the community without expecting any compensation. The review service is a kind of “service to profession” that mentally makes the reviewer happy.