‘Demystifying the publication process’ was the first of our new online support network sessions led by academic author and professional proofreader and editor Louise Duckling. I was one of a group of twelve taken through the processes of monograph, edited volume and journal article publication from first proposal through manuscript submission, copyediting and proofreading to the finished product.
For me the overriding message from Louise that ran though all these stages is the need to be clear about what you are seeking to do: why your work matters, your audience and your realistic timetable. Academic publishing is a competitive world, a marketplace with slim profit margins and commissioning editors have to be able to justify a project. It has to have a readership, be fresh and have perennial interest. Journal articles have a limited word count so editors are looking for those that make one clear, new point and that above all fall within the journal’s scope. Many articles are rejected, the majority because they are not in scope. So do your research. Look at publishers’ lists, find gaps or alternatively series to which your work makes a contribution. Tailor your proposal to the individual publisher, fill in their forms and have an attention-grabbing, one-sentence summary of why your book matters.
For me, another takeaway from the session is that it pays to talk: talk to commissioning editors at conferences and find out what they have in the pipeline, what are the gaps they have in their lists; talk to your peers to learn their experience of different publishing houses and journals; and once your proposal is accepted keep talking to your editor to resolve issues quickly and painlessly.
Then there is the important factor of accuracy. When your proposal has been accepted make sure you submit a ‘clean’ manuscript and be attentive to copy-editing and proofreading. Most publishers have no budget for language editing : it is up to you and there may be imported errors that you need to pick up. Above all follow submission guidelines and rules over length (you can be under- but not over-length) and house style. Don’t ask for big changes at the proofreading stage – it will throw the set page format.
And a word or two about the peer review process both at proposal and submission. It can be daunting to receive criticism but try to see this as positive – helping to make your book or article better. Respond to comments in a calm, structured way but ultimately Louise encouraged us to own our own work. Editors can read between the lines of an apparently ‘bad’ review, so this does not necessarily mean game over.
The PDF of Louise’s PowerPoint presentation is available to all WSG members, to whom she has also generously offered 30-minute one-to-one sessions [for details, email: louise@louiseduckling.com], so armed with her advice I am sure we can look forward to seeing many books and articles from among you.
***
The next online support network session will be on Saturday 24th January 2026 at 10am-12 noon (UK time). Sara Read, University of Loughborough, will take us through her ‘Top 10 Tips to producing quick and succinct PowerPoint presentations for conferences’ . To book one of the 20 available places, or for queries, please contact Sara on s.l.read@lboro.ac.uk.
Women's Studies Group 1558 - 1837 