Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    Hands-On Career Preparation
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    Alternative Pathways
Sign In
Advice

Why It’s OK to Submit Flawed Work

By Rebecca Schuman May 13, 2019
Tim Gunn -
Getty Images

Editor’s Note: This is the sixth and final column in the “Are You Writing?” series on scholarly productivity. Read the first five essays here.


Here’s a scenario that might seem familiar: You are this close to finishing an article or chapter of your book. All that’s left is to wrap up one teeny final section and polish the intro and conclusion. And then, suddenly: the freakout.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

Editor’s Note: This is the sixth and final column in the “Are You Writing?” series on scholarly productivity. Read the first five essays here.


Here’s a scenario that might seem familiar: You are this close to finishing an article or chapter of your book. All that’s left is to wrap up one teeny final section and polish the intro and conclusion. And then, suddenly: the freakout.

In my writing and productivity consulting practice, I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen this happen to academic clients. Speedy progress on an article, chapter, or even an entire monograph. But then it turns weird, and they begin to say things like:

  • “I decided that there were 25 more theorists I had to work with in this section that was supposed to be 500 words.”
  • Or, “I printed the whole thing out and cut it into literal pieces of paper and spread them all over my kitchen floor.”
  • Or, “I realized the thesis was entirely wrong, and I had to rewrite the whole thing.”
  • Or just, “I’ll never get it, never!”

Something bizarre happens during that final 10 percent. Something that turns mild-mannered scholars into full-on academic zombies, insatiable for the innards of the meticulous arguments they just spent months crafting. For some reason — actually, for reasons that are transparent, and I’ll get to them — just before a piece of writing is ready to leave a writer’s hands, said writer gets a major case of the Project Runways.

Are You Writing?
Are You Writing?
Advice for graduate students and faculty members on scholarly productivity, with suggestions on how to write more — and better — with less angst.
  • OK, I Admit It: Productivity Is Overrated
  • Step Away From the Delete Button
  • The Hardest Part of Writing Is Restarting

Yes, I’m referring to the classic reality-TV show on fashion design, now in its umpteenth incarnation. In its early years, the show’s mentor, Tim Gunn, would offer a robust critique of a particular garment and tell the designer that this was a “make it work” moment. What he meant: The designer needed to finesse an inspired idea. What the contestants often heard: Throw the garment out and start over. Then these otherwise-brilliant designers would end up sending what essentially amounted to a sack of flour down the runway, sheepishly explaining that they’d created it in two hours. The result was a ticket “auf” the show.

Stay with me. This exact thing applies to academic writing: Anything that you produce in two days to replace months of careful writing — because suddenly you’ve realized something about your manuscript doesn’t quite work — is garbage. Meanwhile, what you thought was garbage because it had a few drafty little problems in it? That had the potential to be great, and you chucked it.

Some of you have the self-discipline not to chuck your manuscript, but you do something almost as bad: You keep revising it … and revising it … and revising it, until it’s an unrecognizable version of its former self. You abjectly refuse to let anyone look at it until it’s “ready,” by which you mean “perfect,” which it never will be, so maybe you should just start over, right?

To quote that great theorist, Lloyd Dobler: “You must chill!”

Step away from the keyboard. Take a deep breath. Now pay very careful attention to what I’m about to say: That unacceptably facile argument or glaring dearth of adequate citations you just discovered? It is a cruel academic illusion. It’s nothing more than Impostor Syndrome, back again to make itself at home in your head and turn all your productivity into gnawing self-doubt. It’s your anxiety telling you that if you don’t fix this newly discovered flaw immediately, everyone will know that you are a big faking faker who knows nothing about anything, and you will never get tenure, never!

ADVERTISEMENT

So here’s what you do. It’s not as simple as taking that voice in your head and telling it to shove off (as I can attest from my own experiences with anxiety). Attempting to beat anxiety back just makes it come at you stronger. Instead, whenever you notice (or, more accurately, your partner or friends notice) that you have started to spiral out of control in the last phases of a writing project, try this three-step process:

Step No. 1: Admit the anxiety. Recognize that you are feeling it, that it’s present, that it’s making you feel very, very bad, and that you want to take what seems like the only reasonable remedy — i.e., immediately trash the manuscript causing you that anxiety.

Step No. 2: Make a two-column list. On the left side, put everything you are feeling about what you need to do right now. Don’t hold back. Then on the right side, write the actual, dispassionate fact of the situation that vaguely corresponds to that feeling. For example:

  • Feeling: “This entire thesis is garbage, and a 4-year-old could have come up with it. Everyone is going to make fun of me at the conference, and I’ll be the first person in the history of my institution to be sent back to my B.A. program for being so bad at research.”
  • Fact: “The crux of my argument in Section III isn’t quite working at present, and the larger argument of my manuscript depends on the crux of Section III.”

Step No. 3: Ignore half of the list. Under no circumstances should you act on anything that appears in the left column of that list. Instead, concentrate on the facts you’ve listed in the right column and on what you need to do to remedy most of them. Notice that I said most — not all. In your “final” revision of the project, take care of most of the problems, but leave at least one unresolved. In the words of another great mentor, that esteemed philosopher Elsa of Arendelle, you’ve got to let it go. Then show your draft with its unresolved issue to someone.

This trick works for several reasons. First, it gets you to wrest the thing from your neurotic little mitts in the first place, since scholars publish exactly zero percent of the work they don’t submit. Second, it forces you to do something you were going to do anyway: Show your imperfect work to another human being.

ADVERTISEMENT

Because here’s the thing: Even if you magically got your work into what you very much believe to be a perfect state, it is the literal job of your dissertation adviser, mentor, peer reviewer, or editor to find faults in it. And they will. So why not lob them a softball or two?

Worst-case scenario: You get told to fix something you already knew you had to fix. Plus you bought yourself some time to figure out how to “make it work.” Best-case scenario: Your reader doesn’t actually find fault with the thing you think is a deal-breaker, and you save a trunkload of time.

Now here’s the fun part. Both of those scenarios are actually the best-case scenario. Because you did it — you stopped overworking your writing or, worse, sloppily redoing it. You let go what needed to be let go.

Most important of all, you refused to let your natural and understandable anxiety masquerade as fact. You trusted, even shakily, your own worth and intellect, and kept the academic zombie apocalypse at bay for just a little longer.

Rebecca Schuman received her Ph.D. in German from the University of California at Irvine in 2010. She is an essayist, translator, consultant, and author, most recently, of Schadenfreude, A Love Story. “Are You Writing?” is her series on scholarly productivity. Her website is Academic Adjacent, and her Twitter handle is @pankisseskafka.

Read other items in Are You Writing?.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
About the Author
Rebecca Schuman
Rebecca Schuman is a career instructor of English at the University of Oregon and an academic-productivity consultant. Read her previous columns on scholarly writing and work habits here.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Collage of charts
Data
How Faculty Pay and Tenure Can Change Depending on Academic Discipline
Vector illustration of two researcher's hands putting dollar signs into a beaker leaking green liquid.
'Life Support'
As the Nation’s Research-Funding Model Ruptures, Private Money Becomes a Band-Aid
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through a flat black and white university building and a landscape bearing the image of a $100 bill.
Budget Troubles
‘Every Revenue Source Is at Risk’: Under Trump, Research Universities Are Cutting Back
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome topping a jar of money.
Budget Bill
Republicans’ Plan to Tax Higher Ed and Slash Funding Advances in Congress

From The Review

Photo-based illustration of the sculpture, The Thinker, interlaced with anotehr image of a robot posed as The Thinker with bits of binary code and red strips weaved in.
The Review | Essay
What I Learned Serving on My University’s AI Committee
By Megan Fritts
Illustration of a Gold Seal sticker embossed with President Trump's face
The Review | Essay
What Trump’s Accreditation Moves Get Right
By Samuel Negus
Illustration of a torn cold seal sticker embossed with President Trump's face
The Review | Essay
The Weaponization of Accreditation
By Greg D. Pillar, Laurie Shanderson

Upcoming Events

Ascendium_06-10-25_Plain.png
Views on College and Alternative Pathways
Coursera_06-17-25_Plain.png
AI and Microcredentials
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin