An edited collection challenging pervasive myths that undermine effective scientific communication—for scientists, students, educators, administrators, and the broader public.
Widely held beliefs about scientific writing shape how science is taught, practiced, and communicated. Such beliefs rest on problematic assumptions that can undermine effective scientific communication, constrain participation in scientific discourse, and obscure the rhetorical complexity of knowledge-making in scientific contexts.
Although scholars in rhetoric, composition, writing studies, science communication, technical communication, and related fields regularly debate best practices in scholarly venues, the conversations rarely reach the broader publics who shape how scientific writing is conceptualized, taught, and practiced.
Bad Ideas about Scientific Writing aims to bridge that gap by providing clearly articulated, research-based arguments accessible to scientists, students, educators, administrators, editors, policymakers, and general readers.
We seek contributions that translate specialized knowledge into prose that engages educated general readers while maintaining scholarly rigor.
Think of your chapter as a conversation starter that will help reshape public understanding of scientific writing—not as a traditional academic essay. We encourage a tone that is opinionated yet evidence-based, critical yet constructive.
We invite proposals that address misconceptions and misunderstandings across all aspects of scientific writing. The following categories are illustrative—not exhaustive.
Please submit a 250–300 word proposal that addresses each of the following elements.
We welcome contributions from scholars, researchers, and professionals at all career stages, including graduate students, contingent faculty, and practitioners outside traditional academic settings.
This collection is written for—and by—the full range of people who engage with scientific writing.
Kristin's primary field of research is the rhetoric of health and medicine, with particular focus on the circulation of information between experts and non-experts in critical care and clinical research contexts. Her research interests include scientific writing and writing in the sciences, qualitative research methodologies, and health technologies.
Her most recent book, A History of Rhetoric, Sound, and Health and Healing (Routledge, 2024), was published open access. Her forthcoming book, Patient and Public Involvement in Clinical Research: Implementation and Practice (CRC Press), provides practical guidance for clinical researchers. She holds a graduate certificate in Medical Writing and Editing from the University of Chicago.
Kirsti's research and teaching focus on rhetoric and composition theory and methods, multimodal composition, writing-enriched curriculum program administration, and writing across the curriculum. She holds a graduate certificate in Medical Writing and Editing from the University of Chicago.
She is co-author (with Chris M. Anson) of a chapter in Bad Ideas about AI and Writing (forthcoming 2025) and has authored or co-edited seven books, including Transformations: Change Work Across Writing Programs, Pedagogies, and Practices (Utah State UP, 2021). Her recent work examines the impact of AI on writing and cognitive models of composition.
Submit a 250–300 word proposal using the subject line: Bad Ideas CFP — [Your Bad Idea in Brief]
Submit Your Proposal