This action research project derives from my experience supporting postgraduate students and staff as they prepare materials for publication. Much of this support happens through a peer-review group in which participants circulate drafts, read each other’s work, and then offer oral feedback in an online or in-person session. The feedback is tailored to the student’s request and typically focuses on how the text is received by its intended audience – clarity, structure, argument, tone – as well as content and strategies for responding to peer reviewers’ comments.¹
My research question is How can UAL (and I ) better support students writing for publication? This involves identifying additional forms of support or resources that could strengthen existing provision and be incorporated into my peer review group to support students in navigating the publication process.
Initially, my research focused on writing for publication among students for whom English is not a first language, and on how these students might be supported to meet the high standards required for academic publication. (The problematisation of this initial focus, and the development of my original research question, are documented in the document below). However, as I began gathering data on students’ experiences and perspectives, my focus shifted. Students’ accounts highlighted challenges that extended beyond writing itself, leading me to broaden the scope of the research to include other forms of support.
My research question is important because students want to publish but face multiple barriers. Some of these barriers are external to the teaching and learning context, such as editorial practices and publishing structures, and are beyond institutional control. Others, however, relate directly to the educational environment and represent areas where universities can intervene. These barriers include challenges related to writing (both linguistic and conceptual), limited understanding of publication processes and expectations, and uncertainty about how to position work for particular audiences.2
Existing literature identifies numerous benefits associated with publishing, including professional development, career progression, professional recognition, and the advancement of knowledge for both authors and readers. When barriers to publishing exist, access to these benefits is unevenly distributed, reinforcing existing inequalities within academia. Eliminating these barriers is therefore important to enable a wider range of voices, experiences, and forms of knowledge to be represented.
Given the timeframe of this project, it is not possible to address all potential barriers I identify in this research. Instead, the focus is on understanding what UAL PhD students perceive as the most significant obstacles in their own contexts and on creating an action plan to propose change.
After an initial round of interviews, I refined my research into the following sub-questions (objectives):
- What do students identify as the main barriers to writing for publication within the arts context?
- What does writing for publication mean for students in an arts-based university?
- What existing support and resources are already available to students?
- How do students experience the peer review group, and what aspects could be improved?3
¹ See the page Preparing for Publication. Dear reader, if you would like to receive feedback on materials intended for publication, you are welcome to join the peer review group.
2 See the blog Notes on Reading for a discussion of these topics and the associated bibliography.
3 One obvious question to ask would be why I did not carry out a critical review of the peer review group itself. In practice, this felt difficult and, at this stage, too early. The group sits outside any formal curriculum or departmental structure and is deliberately informal. It grew out of my own desire to connect with other researchers and to respond to students and colleagues who wanted to publish but were often unsure how to go about it.
The group responds to a very specific need: receiving direct, detailed feedback on a draft text, where reviewers spend time reading the work and offering considered responses. One PhD student described this as quite unique within UAL; while other ‘peer review’ groups exist, these usually involve immediate feedback on a presentation rather than sustained engagement with a written text (January 2026, personal correspondence).
Another challenge is the nature of participation. Students typically attend only two or three sessions, as groups are often organised around specific themes and attract a wide range of participants. This means there is considerable turnover, and some students’ experience of the group may be limited to just one or two sessions. Tracking participants and gathering feedback would therefore be complicated.
Although reviewing the peer review group is something I would like to do in the future, for this project I felt it would be more useful to focus on understanding students’ experiences, feelings, and the resources available to them when writing for publication. This felt like a more productive starting point, which might allow me in the future to adapt and develop the peer review group.