<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 38,561</title>
	<atom:link href="http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/11/30/38561/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/11/30/38561/</link>
	<description>A blog about sedimentary geology.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:49:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kim</title>
		<link>http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/11/30/38561/#comment-1805</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 20:56:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clasticdetritus.com/2007/11/30/38561/#comment-1805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The word count as a measure of success doesn&#039;t fit scientific writing very well. Journals always seem to want the paper to be shorter (but to contain more content). (And grant proposals are worse!)

I wrote stand-alone papers for my dissertation, too. I thought it was good training in the art of writing a publishable paper. (And because I went straight into teaching in a temporary job, rather than getting a post-doc, it was the only training I ever had. Otherwise, I would have been learning a new writing style without the benefit of constant discussions with my committee members.)

My grad advisor, though, questioned whether it was a good approach. I think she kind of liked the old tomes, and there were things she wanted me to say that weren&#039;t really defensible to our most likely reviewers. (Actually, the comments you&#039;ve received sound like something my grad advisor might say at random during Friday Beer...)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The word count as a measure of success doesn&#8217;t fit scientific writing very well. Journals always seem to want the paper to be shorter (but to contain more content). (And grant proposals are worse!)</p>
<p>I wrote stand-alone papers for my dissertation, too. I thought it was good training in the art of writing a publishable paper. (And because I went straight into teaching in a temporary job, rather than getting a post-doc, it was the only training I ever had. Otherwise, I would have been learning a new writing style without the benefit of constant discussions with my committee members.)</p>
<p>My grad advisor, though, questioned whether it was a good approach. I think she kind of liked the old tomes, and there were things she wanted me to say that weren&#8217;t really defensible to our most likely reviewers. (Actually, the comments you&#8217;ve received sound like something my grad advisor might say at random during Friday Beer&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

