The Academic Publishing Exchange, held last Thursday at the Newcastle Australia Institute of Higher Education, was an intensive, full-day session that brought together 24 attendees, including lecturers, professors, Ph.D. candidates, and master’s students. The event offered a dynamic platform for knowledge sharing and professional growth, with early-career and experienced scholars joining forces to learn about the ins and outs of academic publishing.

The day kicked off with “Reasons for Rejection at Pre-Checks”, presented by Dr. Nicholas Cho, Associate Editor for the International Journal of Molecular Sciences (IJMS, ISSN: 1422-0067). Drawing from real-world experience, Dr. Cho outlined common causes of early manuscript rejection—such as incomplete submissions, formatting issues, ethical concerns, and mismatches between manuscript focus and journal scope. His practical tips gave attendees a clearer understanding of what editors look for in the initial screening process.

Next, Dr. Wei Thye Lee tackled “How to Respond to Peer Reviewers”. The session was split into two parts. In the first, Dr. Lee discussed how to craft respectful and professional responses to reviewer comments, emphasizing clarity and constructive engagement. Using real examples, he provided attendees with a roadmap to turn peer review into an opportunity to strengthen their manuscripts.

The second part, “Skill Lab: Reviewer Says, You Respond”, gave participants a hands-on challenge. Groups were tasked with crafting thoughtful replies to real reviewer comments, applying the principles discussed. This interactive activity sparked lively discussion, collaboration, and a few laughs, making it one of the day’s most engaging moments.

After a well-deserved lunch break, the session resumed with “How to Write and Structure an Academic Paper”. Dr. Lee provided a clear framework for structuring research papers—from the introduction to the conclusion—while emphasizing the importance of writing style, clarity, and coherence. During the Q&A, participants discussed the differences in writing style between social sciences and hard sciences. Social sciences focus on argumentation and analysis, while hard sciences emphasize presenting data and facts directly, offering a fascinating exchange of ideas across disciplines.

In the afternoon, participants enjoyed “Skill Lab: Catchy Yet Clear”, where they transformed dull, uninspiring titles into catchy, attention-grabbing ones. The challenge encouraged creativity and strategic thinking, helping attendees appreciate the critical role a strong title plays in academic publishing.

By the end of the day, participants walked away with practical skills, strategies, and a deeper understanding of academic publishing. The event was filled with insightful discussions, engaging activities, and valuable takeaways, equipping attendees with the knowledge and confidence needed to navigate the world of academic publishing.