Editor's Note
Recently, the research findings of Sun Zhijun, a Ph.D. student of Talent IntroductionCCSL, and Professor Wang Jianqin, the director ofCCSL, were published in the internationally renowned core journal Language Assessment Quarterly.CCSLResearch Association invited student Sun Zhijun to share his experience in conducting academic research and publishing international academic achievements.
Introduction of Interviewee
Sun Zhijun: Ph.D. student at the Innovation Talent IntroductionCCSLfor Language Cognitive Science, majoring in Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. He is also a lecturer at the International Education College of Shandong Normal University. He has published academic achievements in "Teaching and Research of Chinese as a Foreign Language" and his main research interests are second language acquisition and testing.
Context of Interview
1.How to find research questions worth exploring in the learning process?
It is essential to find a starting point for one's research area and delve deeper into it. As my supervisor Professor Wang Jianqin frequently says, "You must find the endpoint of the previous research, which will be the starting point of your research." To illustrate this point, for my most recent publication, Professor Wang determined that my research interest was the interface of testing and learning when I first enrolled in Beijing Language and Culture University. He gave lectures on this topic, invited experts in dynamic assessment like Professor Qin Tianyu from American universities to give lectures, and encouraged us to engage in discussions. After attending these lectures, I realized their method of measuring was not entirely accurate since they assumed equal interval among levels. This idea led me to consult with my master supervisor, guide, and peers repeatedly to finally prove that the old formula was flawed and performed experiments with Wang, who was a visiting scholar at the time, and my colleague Xu Peng.
In summary, listening to advisors' suggestions, communicating with teachers and classmates, creating small research teams, and engaging in independent thinking all aid in generating worthwhile research questions.
2.Regarding literature review, what strategies do you use to select relevant articles before finalizing a research topic? What are some techniques you use during the literature review process?
After locating core articles, the next step is to read them thoroughly and then expand from there. Continue searching for literature relevant to the subject in reference materials cited in the core literature to increase your reading volume.
Professor Wang always encouraged us to read original English literature, and it is challenging at first to read English texts up to several dozen pages. However, I suggest starting with the first article and gradually brushing up to tackle others, as the quality of articles published in English-language core journals tend to be high and discussing more frontier issues.
3.In terms of time allocation for writing literature, what plan do you think is best?
This article took about five years to complete from when I first developed a research idea. I jokingly say that this article by Sun et al. took from 2017 to 2022. I don't have much eligibility to answer this question, but if I must give advice, then my suggestion is that once committed to writing, continuously work on it and submit without hesitation. Progress can only be made by taking these steps.
4.How can one improve their English academic writing skills?
Regarding this question above, the only way to improve one's writing ability truly is to write. Reading English-language literature can also help, particularly in learning technical terminologies, specific expressions, and phrases. Additionally, support from platforms like the International Masters Program in Educational Psychology helps assist graduate students in improving the quality of their writing skills and reading skills.
5.Can you please tell me the whole process of writing and submitting a paper?
The writing and publishing of this article were somewhat tortuous and took about five years. Initially, when I enrolled in the school, I had a vague idea during my supervisor's class, thematic classes, and expert lectures. After multiple discussions with my supervisor, other teachers, and classmates and validating the concept, I began to write. In 2018, with the support ofCCSL, Professor Wang suggested that our program attend an international academic conference on dynamic assessment, where I submitted the idea and participated in it. During the meeting, I had the honor of attending reports by leading figures in sociocultural theory, Professor James Lantolf, and dynamic assessment authority expert, Professor Matthew Poehner. In a group report, I presented my thoughts to Professor Poehner, who gave me recognition and support. He suggested that we could collaborate and study this issue together.
From writing to submission, it took me almost two years. During this time, I exchanged numerous emails with Professor Poehner (he sent 16 emails alone), and his initial questions were very sharp. If I couldn't answer them, the paper might not have been published. So, I pulled myself together, answered his questions one by one, reorganized my thoughts during the email exchange, continued to discuss with teachers and peers, continually deepened the research on this issue, and gained new insights. Then I started submitting to the Language Assessment Quarterly, which is a special issue initiated by Professor Poehner.
LAQ requires authors to fill out many steps in the online submission process, including author information, whether the experiment was approved by the ethics committee, etc. Then wait for the opinions of external expert reviewers. When we received feedback, we were very excited to find that the article only needed minor revisions, which was fantastic news. As we all know, there are three possible outcomes of article review. One is direct rejection, which means the article has been rejected, and you can only give up or submit it to other journals; the second is significant revision, indicating that the reviewer thinks your topic is still promising, but there are significant problems with expression or experimentation that generally require a rewrite or retesting; the third is the best result- minor revision, indicating that the reviewer is very positive about your article, but minor modifications are needed in certain areas. It is unlikely that there will be articles that do not need modification. If there are, the author must be at the expert level. Therefore, we were delighted to see this feedback, but we also made adequate preparations. Responding to the editor's comments is a technical skill. Firstly, if he asks you to explain, you explain it well, so there is no need for modification. Secondly, if he asks you to modify something you think is right, you can also "rebuttal" his request, but the language must be polite, and you must argueCCSLd on facts, reasoning, and references. For other issues that are really your problem, obediently modify them according to the editor's suggestions.
Finally, after the content of the article had passed the review process, the formatting began, and there were several rounds of back-and-forth by email and system submission. However, progress began to pick up. When I received the "congratulations" email on December 4th, everything was finally settled.
6.What are the differences in publishing academic achievements in foreign journals?
It is difficult to compare the differences between domestic and foreign journals, as I have only published one article in each language. However,CCSLd on the commonalities of these two articles, as long as your article has content and novelty, it can definitely be published. I encourage everyone to submit to foreign journals, as "good wine needs no bush". If you have good research results, but cannot publish them in English for the world to see, you will miss out on the international impact of your work, which is a great pity.
7.s it one submission per manuscript in foreign journals?
Foreign journals strictly follow the policy of one submission per manuscript, which is an issue of academic ethics that we should all adhere to. Although most foreign journals may have short review times, some may take up to a year to reply. In this case, one must be patient and wait or write a new article during this period and continue to submit manuscripts.
