Writing Skills Requirement

The post should be written at a level so that any interested advanced computer science student finding the blog can get something useful out of it. A good yardstick might be your fellow CSD doctoral students who are not necessarily in your own research area.

Suggested length: Around 2500 words (it can be shorter; the length should really just be whatever is necessary to get the main ideas across in a concise, clear, and understandable way). The post should not be longer than 5000 words.

Content: The blog post must present a self-contained, cogent, and engaging narrative on some recent research, including a blend of scientific (high-level) and technical exposition.

• The post can describe the student's own published or accepted research (this will probably be the most common option), or it can summarize an interesting recent line of work in the student's research area (however, the post shouldn't be an opinion piece beyond choice of what to summarize or emphasize).
• Figures/images/tables that add to exposition and enhance understanding are strongly encouraged.

• Bibliography optional but inline references to attributions made in the text should be given.

  Format: The post should build off the provided template file, available from the public git repository https://github.com/cmu-csd-phd/csd-blog, along with detailed instructions (in the README file) on the workflow for downloading the necessary files, building the blog post, and submitting it for review and final posting. It should contain metadata including category and keywords (the categories are to be chosen from a fixed set provided in the template, but keywords are free-flowing).

You must obtain written final approval of the blog post content from:

• One CSD tenure-track/research faculty member.
• One SCS or additional CSD tenure-track/research faculty member.
• One doctoral student who has already passed their writing skills.

The PhD advisor(s) of the student should not serve as a reviewer. A co-author on the work(s) upon which the blog post is based also should not act as a reviewer (though, if required, they can provide informal feedback on initial drafts of the post to the student).

• Choose topic of the blog post
• Gather committee agreeing to review your topic in a timely fashion, subject to above requirement on committee composition. Make sure the committee is aware of the bounded timeframe of the process and their schedule permits providing feedback in a timely fashion.
• Read over the README file on the git repository dedicated to the writing skills https://github.com/cmu-csd-phd/csd-blog and make sure you understand the steps and workflow of the process.
• Prepare initial draft of post and send it to committee
• Your committee should approve unanimously or suggest revisions.
• Non-approval means "not yet pass" and should come with feedback for iteration.
  • Unless there are major issues such as the topic itself no longer being considered viable, or a big pivot in the focus with respect to original intent, this should be a fast and efficient iteration: feedback and revisions should be able to happen within about 2 weeks (maybe longer for the initial draft), perhaps even same day if quick/minor edits)
  • Iterate based on feedback as necessary, until post is approved.
• When your blog post is approved:
  • Get the writing skills blog approval form signed by the committee and provide a PDF of your blog post, along with the signed form for reference to csd-phd-support@cs.cmu.edu so we are certain we are properly publishing your post. 
  • Follow the instructions in the README and submit a pull request to get the blog post, with public committee approval, posted on the CSD PhD blog site.
  • The Doctoral Program Manager keeps copies in your file and indicates in the DSR records that the requirement has been successfully fulfilled.

IMPORTANT! 

Make sure these two items are properly completed or we will not add your post to the blog until they are corrected:

• The date of your blog post in GIT should be the same date as the final approval signature you received, not the date you first did the pull to work on your post. The final signature date is the date the Skill will be recorded as completed in DSR. 
• Enter the names of your reviewers and link to their webpage or you will be asked to fix this so your blog post does not have a broken hash for the reviewers links. 

To satisfy the written communication skill requirement you must write a scholarly document, as either its sole author or its primary author (if co-authored), that is at least the quality of a Carnegie Mellon technical report (http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/cs.html).

• You must obtain written final approval of the document from the Writing Skills Committee. The committee must consist of at least one CSD faculty, an additional member of SCS faculty or other approved faculty, and one SCS PhD student.
• A co-author on a paper can not be a reviewer of that paper to satisfy the writing requirement, and one of the reviewers must be a faculty member of the Department of Computer Science.
• This document must be a scholarly paper with references to the literature that could be sent for peer review.
• It is recommended that the student iterate with at least one faculty member, not necessarily your advisor, in writing this document.

The document can be: 

• A technical report.
• A submitted, accepted, or published conference or journal paper (rejected papers may count since sometimes conference program committees and journal editorial boards have their own agendas).
• A document written to satisfy a course requirement (e.g., a course project's final report)
• A comprehensive survey paper, e.g., suitable for ACM Computing Surveys.
• Annotated bibliographies, user manuals, and reference manuals do not qualify because they do not require the same kind of explication, organization, and summarization skills needed to write a conference- or journal-like publication.

The document cannot be:

• The thesis proposal
• The thesis

• You must get at least two faculty members and one Ph.D graduate student to read the document.
• They must provide written feedback by filling out a Writing Review Form.
• They should meet with you and discuss this feedback.
• They should give final approval by signing the form accordingly.

You then give these three (or more) signed forms to the Graduate Program Manager who keeps copies in your file and indicates in the your records that the requirement has been satisfied.

You are responsible for asking the appropriate faculty members and graduate student to help you with satisfying your writing requirement.

We expect students to be able to satisfy this requirement within their first three years and prior to their thesis proposal.

Please refer to the appropriate handbook in the Handbook Archive for the year you entered the CSD PhD Program. If the handbook you are seeking is not available in the archive please contact the Doctoral Programs Manager.