I often hear that collaborative co-authored humanities research with undergraduates is a problem rather than an opportunity. My colleagues concerns aren’t entirely unreasonable. Humanities faculty publish co-authored work much less frequently than our colleagues in the natural and social sciences do. Similarly, our division (and in particular my home discipline of English) tends to frame knowledge as the result of one scholarly mind at work. This is especially acute in my subfield—contemporary literary studies—where the steps of gathering and of interpreting material happen almost simultaneously as the scholar reads the literary text. As a result, it is much harder to identify hierarchies of co-authors than in academic fields in which student collaborators take on discrete, bounded parts of the data collection and analysis processes.
In this post, I share my experience co-authoring with undergraduates as we worked on an article together, from our initial mentored research experience through submitting the piece for publication. I will speak honestly about the difficulties I encountered, but I want to emphasize the benefits it afforded—not only for the students, but for my work and thinking as well.
The project began in a collaborative and mentored research experience. Funded by my institution, two students worked with me for six weeks on a project surveying major trends across a broad corpus of “cli-fi,” or climate fiction. After a one-week calibration stage, we spent three weeks independently recording our findings in relation to a set of shared questions: representations of climate science; engagements with climate justice; discussion of adaptation and/or mitigation; relevant climate communication frameworks; and notable formal and stylistic features. During the last two weeks, all participants extended this work into their individual humanities research interests they had developed during the project: I worked on the book chapter that the research project was initially proposed to support; the two students took up, respectively, Indigenous cli-fi and climate fantasy. As our project drew to a close, we reflected on our various interests and findings, and a shared argument began to emerge. All of us were pushing in some way against the dominant critical praise of cli-fi as representing realistic futures; all of us were also finding that our texts were most, and most successfully, interested in navigating questions of community formation and collectivity in relation to climate catastrophe. Now the only outcome required by our institution was that the students present their work at annual research symposium. But the students had grown excited about the project and invested in the broader implications of the work they had begun to pursue. When I mentioned the possibility of seeking to publish, they seized on the idea of a co-authored article, and our work began. Three insights from that process on co-authoring with undergraduates are below.
What to Expect, Part I: Emergent and Evolving Arguments
Rarely do I begin writing an article without a very clear sense of the argument. This project was quite different. Because it was the combined product of three minds, it took different shapes at different points: we had to adjust and expand earlier argumentative structures that didn’t quite “fit” our shared goals; brilliant points (mostly theirs!) that detracted from the overall arc needed editing to be less central or saved for future projects. In the end, this was good for all of us. I saw how the experience cemented the value of revision and the
writing process for the students, turning them into even more mature writers and peer editors. I also found the experience useful during my own simultaneous process of working on my book manuscript, helping me to get back in the habit of rereading, realigning, and letting projects take the best shape possible, not just the shape I had initially planned.
What to Expect, Part II: Necessary Division of Labor
Undergraduate co-authors may be better prepared to write some sections than others. My co-authors produced thoughtful, purposeful, and attentive close readings; but they were less equipped to make the case about how these readings fit within larger conversations, or to articulate how these readings intervened in contemporary scholarly debates. This isn’t to say they didn’t understand the big picture! But dividing our work so that I was responsible for the argumentative frame while they tackled the readings and analysis proved immensely useful for us. Not only did we move more efficiently—I also saw how valuable it was for them to get firsthand experience with how their astute insights and instincts could develop into scholarly arguments. Subsequent drafts of the article showed how this exercise had tightened and advanced their critical voice, as they fine-tuned their individual points to fit into the broader arc. Meanwhile, papers they wrote for me in subsequent classes clarified for me how formative this experience was to their confidence and their ability to tackle more ambitious arguments.
What to Expect, Part III: Slow and Unsteady Pacing
Like many humanists, I’m accustomed to working largely at my own pace, with whatever lapses and sprints that my schedule (and my relationship to the projects in question!) demands. Co-authoring with undergraduates means all of the pauses that are inevitable when different schedules collide—delays that many of us may have experienced mostly on the editorial end of things, and are only exacerbated by the fact that undergraduate co-authors are juggling even
more obligations, with even less extrinsic motivation to finish an academic article. My student co-authors were organized, dedicated, and eminently responsible. Even so, things moved slowly, and required consistent project management and strategic long-term scheduling on my end. The downside: those on tight tenure clocks may not find this to be the most efficient path toward a publication line. The upside: this project benefited immensely from time and perspective and helped me remember the profound value of sitting with ideas and delving into them rather than rushing.
As of this point, we have completed a draft of the article and are preparing to submit it to an academic journal. Stay tuned for an update post on the blog reflecting on the experience of navigating peer review while co-authoring with undergraduates in humanities research!
