Building a Paper Step by Step for Reluctant Writers

building a – A literacy education faculty piece argues that academic writing—often treated as a last-minute task—can be approached like constructing a home, with a clear sequence of stages from choosing a topic through submitting a draft, using the 6+1 Traits model as guid

When writing for publication keeps getting pushed to “someday. ” the problem usually isn’t a lack of ideas—it’s how the work is treated. The article frames academic writing as expected labor in higher education, even when faculty find it hard to start. Lack of time is described as the primary obstacle. but confidence. affective barriers. and physical barriers also get in the way.

The authors say they’re self-proclaimed procrastinators when it comes to writing. often postponing the task until there’s a pocket of time—usually after other unfinished business takes over. Writing, they stress, is still part of the job. So they offer a model intended to help reluctant writers get started and keep moving toward publication.

The approach is an analogy: good writing isn’t just written, it’s constructed. To make that idea practical. the piece encourages a mental picture of building a house and applies it directly to building a paper. The “supplies” are the 6+1 Trait Writing model—ideas. organization. voice. word choice. sentence fluency. conventions. and presentation—listed in order of importance (Culham. 2003). The structure is meant to match how house building works: start with the big picture, then move steadily toward details.

The steps unfold like a build plan, from the earliest choices to the final move-in.

First comes selecting the “property”—in writing terms, choosing a topic and the surrounding context. The article asks authors to pick their “plot,” including the literature community their work belongs to. It suggests deciding whether the piece is for practitioners alongside shared work or whether it’s more theoretical. Writers are encouraged to “read around the area” by visiting other intellectual communities to determine how their topic fits into existing literature. describing this as where “ideas” take shape.

Next is getting the plan “stamped.” If the inquiry involves creating surveys or data collection mechanisms. the piece points to Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval when necessary. It also addresses studies or writing from collected artifacts, including cases where data may already be gathered. In that phase. the article emphasizes planning well-engineered methods and designs. and it notes that writers may need resources to manage data and generate theory.

After that, the model moves to selecting a builder—or a team. The authors position the writer as the general contractor or author, but they also recommend considering a co-author. Different experts. they say. can help move the work along and improve the chances of getting a piece published or even “moved in” sooner. The article urges writers to consider what experience or perspective a co-author can add. whether as a consultant or as someone working directly alongside them. and it gives an example of needing technical assistance for data analysis.

Then there is “site clearance”—clearing time and space. The article ties writing progress to schedule decisions: clear the calendar for the devoted period you plan to use. close email. and find a distraction-free space. It emphasizes that writing projects have deadlines for journals. and it describes the moment of decision as something to mark on the calendar and put into a timeline.

With that in place, the writer lays the foundation by organizing the paper. The piece explains that this does not have to be written in complete sentences. but it should include general ideas about how the paper will develop. It offers a starting frame beginning with “this appears to be the situation. ” followed by what others are saying. what others suggest will make an impact. and what the writer is proposing as a leverage point for shifting thought. action. technique. or achievement.

Once the foundation is set, the model calls for framing: write an outline and list headings for sections. Even when the exact points aren’t fully known. the article says writers can still include headings like “Methods. ” “Results. ” “Discussion. ” and “Conclusion”—describing these as the floors. walls. and roof of the structure. It instructs authors to cycle back and fill in the “vertical walls” by securing each section with articulation.

Then comes the “lock up” stage—writing a complete first draft. The article draws a clear distinction from home building: unlike a finished house, writing a first draft doesn’t have to be perfect. It compares early drafts to studs you can see the potential in, even if the inside isn’t finished.

Regular breaks are next. The piece argues that it’s unrealistic to finish in one day. pointing out that writers—like contractors—move among other jobs and responsibilities. It recommends walking away and returning on another day. then surveying previous work with a fresh look that changes how the writing is seen.

After breaks, the model moves to interior finishes. This is described as a time to focus on voice and sentence fluency. framed through the metaphor of roughing in electrical. plumbing. and HVAC. The article also encourages additional research to support weaker portions of the paper—adding evidence as “nuggets” throughout the draft—and it treats this stage as where writers notice areas needing revision and finishing touches. It closes the loop by describing short visits at the site or desk work to check edits with fresh eyes. then running the piece through a final check for conventions and formatting.

From there, the writer takes a “walk through.” When the project is finished, the article says getting a second opinion and/or showing the paper to a peer can be helpful. It then advises taking constructive feedback and revisiting earlier stages based on the advice, before sending the work off.

Finally. “moving in” is framed as publication: the code enforcer stopping by becomes the idea of enforcement and scrutiny. and the article refers to getting a “Certificate of Occupancy” as a metaphor for meeting publication requirements. It adds that reviewers or publication standards may find something that must be addressed. but that choosing the right journal or outlet for publication can increase the likelihood that the workmanship is acceptable even if changes are required.

The authors stress that these steps aren’t always linear. Just as building a house can involve setbacks, writing can too. The key, they say, is accommodating disruptions without abandoning the project, stepping in and out over time while keeping the writing on course toward completion.

The piece ends where it began: with the writing project waiting to be started. With a strong structure and careful craftsmanship, it says writers will find their voice.

Michelle Ciminelli, PhD, is an associate professor of literacy education at Niagara University in Lewiston, New York. Paula Adams is an assistant professor of literacy education at Niagara University in Lewiston, New York.

The references listed are Mazak (2022) Making time to write: How to resist the patriarchy and take control of your academic career through writing (Morgan James Publishing) and Culham (2003) 6+1 traits of writing: The complete guide, grades 3 and up (New York: Scholastic Professional Books).

academic writing higher education faculty writing 6+1 traits of writing publication process procrastination writing productivity first draft co-author