Top Research Universities Spent Less on Lobbying Congress in Q3 (October 28, 2026)

The Price of Closing a University Museum (October 26, 2026)

Dartmouth Provost Resigns After Review Found He ‘Was Not Forthcoming’ About AI Use (October 25, 2026)

Utah Legislative Audit Suggests Reducing Tenure Protections (October 22. 2026)

The post Industry News Round-Up Week of 10/26/2026 appeared first on Abstract.

Brenda Ulrich, who also serves on the TAA Board, is a partner at Archstone, and is an intellectual property attorney who focuses on publishing, higher education, copyright and trademark law. Brenda represents authors negotiating and interpreting publishing agreements, agency agreements, and joint author agreements. She also advises colleges and universities on the development and implementation of intellectual property policies, navigating copyright questions related to teaching and scholarship, as well as managing and defending college and university trademark portfolios.

Join us for the 2027 Textbook & Academic Authoring Conference

While digital connections have kept us moving, nothing replaces the energy of a live & in-person conference. On June 11 & 12, we are stepping away from the screen and back onto the stage at the tommie Austin in Austin, Texas, for the Textbook & Academic Authors Association’s 2027 Textbook & Academic Authoring Conference.

We invite you to join us to:

• Explore and exchange ideas on the future of the textbook and academic authoring industry, with special focus on evolving topics such as AI.
• Learn textbook and academic writing tips and strategies to inspire you to complete your writing projects.
• Connect with other academic and textbook authors from a variety of writing disciplines.

To ensure an intimate and high-quality experience, registration will be limited to 100 attendees, so prepare to register as soon as registration opens on January 7, 2027.

The post Archstone Law Sponsoring 2027 TAA Conference on Textbook & Academic Authoring appeared first on Abstract.

“While TAA is aware that Class Counsel and Cou​nsel for Anthropic are ​asking to make updates to the settlement website, including supplementation of the already voluminous information and instructions in the ‘FAQ’ provided to claimants, we feel obligated to inform the court that the process has already become incredibly burdensome and disproportionately prejudices authors,” wrote Pawlak.

Pawlak’s letter was accompanied by several author letters detailing their individual experiences navigating the Anthropic Settlement process.

The letter was drafted with the guidance of attorneys David Slarskey at Slarskey LLC, and Brenda Ulrich at Archstone Law, both of whom have been working with TAA for more than a year to provide guidance to authors whose works are included in the settlement.

Visit TAA’s Anthropic settlement guidance page for information on how to navigate the settlement process, including tips for negotiating allocation percentages with your publisher. View the full letter and Exhibit A (first letter from settlement administrator to authors) | Exhibit B (second letter from settlement administrator to authors) | Exhibit C (author letters)

The post TAA Executive Director Files Letter to Court Detailing Issues With Anthropic Settlement Process appeared first on Abstract.

New Analysis Finds NIH Awarded 7,400 Fewer Grants (October 16, 2026)

A Planned Intellectual Diversity Accreditation Standard Draws Opposition (October 16, 2026)

Democratic Senators Criticize ED for Front-Loading Grants (October 16, 2026)

Judge declines to block Trump’s March anti-DEI order for federal contractors (October 15, 2026)

Universities Are on an AI Philosopher Hiring Spree (October 15, 2026)

2 Americans Win Nobel Prize in Economics (October 13, 2026)

The post Industry News Round-Up Week of 10/12/2026 appeared first on Abstract.

Why did you decide to write your textbook?

A: Valerie Manusov, co-author of Interpersonal Communication: The Within and The Between (1e), and winner of the Most Promising New Textbook Award (co-authored with Jody Koenig Kellas):

Both Jody and I were not satisfied with existing textbooks on interpersonal communication. They tend to be structured by topic (e.g., self-disclosure, nonverbal communication) and/or context (e.g., relationships, workplaces). We felt that kept interpersonal processes separated from one another, which is not what real interpersonal communicating is like. We had both started teaching courses without a textbook, using instead academic and popular articles and book chapters. Both of us were using a different structure — one that had each section of the course oriented to a “big picture” or “what is most important for you to know about IPC.” Jody started thinking more about both orienting a book around this orientation and also reached out to colleagues via Facebook for what they thought was most important for our students to takeaway from a class on IPC. That led her to contact a publisher friend of ours (Todd Armstrong from Cognella), someone who is very active in the discipline and gets to know many of us personally (a great way to convince us to work with him). He loved the idea for the book, and Jody then reached out to me to see if I’d like to join her on the project. We met up for a writing retreat and talked a lot online, clarifying our perspective and what big ideas (which we call “takeaways”) we wanted to include. The specific material that was included in separate chapters is now woven across the book as it fits within certain takeaways.

A: Kristen Carioti, author of Introduction to Personal Finance: A Step-by-Step Guide to Financial Freedom (1e), and winner of the Most Promising New Textbook Award:

When I started teaching personal finance, I couldn’t find a textbook that would work for my students. I wanted something inclusive, accessible, and modern, and that just didn’t exist in the market so I decided to write it myself. While a huge project to write my first textbook, it’s rewarding to know the book will have a positive impact on students’ financial lives. 

A: James Foulds, co-author of Data Mining (5e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award (co-authored with Ian H. Witten, Eibe Frank, Mark A. Hall, and Christopher J. Pal):

I wrote the new edition of the textbook because the book has always been dear to me, and I was uniquely positioned to help. The book was written by my undergraduate and master’s mentors, Eibe Frank, Ian Witten, and colleagues, and I “grew up” with it, then went on to teach using it.

A: Tom Leslie, co-author of Design-Tech: Building Science for Architects (3e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award (co-authored with Rob Whitehead and Jason Alread):

My co-author, Jason Alread, and I were asked to re-imagine the architectural technology sequence in our graduate program when we were teaching at Iowa State. We developed coursework that relied more on hands-on learning and less on math, since architects work with engineers and need to understand concepts as much as details. As we were putting the class notes together, we realized that this approach could be useful for other programs, and so we consciously started writing those as “chapters.”  The first edition of Design-Tech really developed on its own as we wrote and refined the classes.

A: Samantha Strong, author of Introduction to Visual Optics: A Light Approach (1e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award:

When I first started teaching, I was keen to find resources that were accessible whilst also inspiring fun and interest in my students, but I couldn’t find exactly what I wanted so I illustrated a whole series of handouts myself. These handouts were then positively reviewed by students and colleagues who helped me see the potential value of my approach.

A: David Tong, author of Lectures on Theoretical Physics (volume 1: Classical Mechanics, volume 2: Electromagnetism, volume 3: Quantum Mechanics, volume 4: Fluid Mechanics) (1e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award:

I’ve been writing lecture notes for twenty years and making them freely available on my website. These notes now cover a large swathe of theoretical physics, from first year courses to advanced graduate level. I thought it was about time that they grew up and became proper books.

A: Jeffrey Brodd, co-author of Invitation to World Religions (5e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award (co-authored with Bradley Nystrom, Robert Platzner, Richard Shek, and Erin Stiles):

The members of our author team were not satisfied with textbook options to assign for their world religions classes. The mutually enhancing enterprises of teaching the subject matter in the classroom and writing about it in a textbook made for an ideal opportunity to produce our own. This allowed for us to invent our own organizational structure that seemed pedagogically optimal, and to provide appropriate content, for example, accessible explanations of difficult but fundamental issues, such as how Buddhist meditation alleviates suffering.

A: Robert Platzner, co-author of Invitation to World Religions (5e), and winner of the Textbook Excellence Award (co-authored with Jeffrey Brodd, Bradley Nystrom, Richard Shek, and Erin Stiles):

Like the rest of my colleagues I found many of the comparable textbooks in World Religions wanting in those areas that I chose to stress in my classes: the philosophical underpinnings of dogmatic systems of religious thought, and the historical development of confessional communities. I felt that what was needed was greater specificity in the description of thought patterns and historical movements that determine both the beliefs and practices of the world’s great religions, and I set out to supply that need. Oxford has a reputation for publishing textbooks of the highest quality and the greatest sophistication, and it was with that thought in mind that I began writing my chapters (on Judaism and New Religious Movements) in the hope that Oxford would agree to adopt our text.

The post Award-Winning Textbook Authors Share Why They Became Authors Cont. | Part 6 appeared first on Abstract.

Q: I How can I stop feeling like I don’t deserve a dissertation or degree?

 — Existentially Squirming

A: In tears, my dissertation client Aurora wailed, “Chapter 2 is destroying me! I’ll be in this article gridlock for the next 10 years! I’m just not dissertation material!”

Aurora’s heartfelt confession was not unusual. In my longtime practice coaching graduate students working on their dissertations, many have complained about being blocked in their writing. It might be the dreaded literature review Chapter 2, or qualitative data analysis, or another section or chapter that particularly bedevils them. But what was more disturbing about Aurora’s cry was her assumption that she wasn’t “dissertation material.”

Instead of tackling her sweeping self-condemnation, I chose to focus on Aurora’s writing block. I helped her rethink the sections of her literature review, then settle on just
one, and concentrate on a single article in that section. If she started doing something, I knew, she’d regain a little confidence and stop disparaging herself.

Sadly, I’ve heard many other students’ self-deprecations: “My father was right—my sister inherited the brains.” “My Aunt Sandra was right—I’ll never get past a master’s.” “My wife is right—I should stick to my job selling cell phones.”

As I thought about these statements, uttered with such fervent certainty, I wondered why doctoral students come to such damaging conclusions. They seem to believe that completing a dissertation requires special gifts or godly dispensations bestowed only on a privileged few, usually fellow students or cohort members who are an enviable draft ahead of them.

Many students lament, “I’ve never done this before.” Of course. Very few have, except the rarified scholar who goes after multiple masters and doctorates. I know of only one, and I suspect he racked up all those degrees from addiction to sagging self- esteem and perpetual studenthood.

If you’re trekking through the dissertation jungle, you may think it’s a test not only of your intelligence but also of your very beingness. Granted, the process can be brutal, especially with chairs, advisers, and committee members who have axes to grind, egos to keep sharpened, and displaced rage from humiliation at their own doctoral experiences. (Unfortunately, essays abound by graduate students about their dissertation horrors.)

How many students, after seeing their latest draft marked up to unreadability by their chairs, go into months-long funks and are sure they’re worthless as human beings? One professor at a prestigious university confessed to me that, during her doctoral years, she received such a bloody draft from her chair and immediately threw her unfinished dissertation under the bed. She didn’t touch it, or vacuum, for four months.

And yet . . . so many doctoral candidates have successfully navigated the shark-infested academic ocean to the promised Shangri-la of doctoral letters after their names. This attainment is not impossible, although difficult and undeniably at great cost.

Thinking about my clients’ exclamations, I asked myself how to help students shake loose their seemingly unalterable assertion that they’re not good enough or smart enough or even worthy at all.

As if in providential answer, a colleague’s email popped up in my inbox with the subject line: “Advice Like Chocolate.” Working on her own doctorate, she said she’d been lamenting to a friend about what she was sure were her personal deficiencies to continue with the work. Her friend interrupted and announced: “You are not your dissertation.”

My colleague gasped.

Her friend continued, “The dissertation is not a test of intelligence or a measure of human worth. You know what it is? A test of consistency and resiliency. The chair and committee are really asking: ‘How much can you take? After we keep knocking you down, how many times can you come back out of your corner, swinging and writing?’ None of it has any relation to your value as a human being.”

I called Aurora and read her my colleague’s words. “Oh, thank you, thank you.” Her voice was on the edge of tears. The following week I received her new Chapter 2 for editing.

At our next coaching call, she said, “You know, when I sat down to write again, I started to feel the old block and all those thoughts of worthlessness taking over. Then I thought about what you said and decided to show it who’s boss.”

“What do you mean?” I asked.

“Well, I talked to my dissertation. I stood up at my desk with my hands on my hips and told it, ‘You are not the definer of my life. You are only a project!’”

“Wow!” I was impressed.

“So,” she continued, “I said to myself, ‘I can do a project.’ And I sat down and got back to work!”

What Aurora did—and I have since advised many other stuck candidates to do—was to gain a perspective on her dissertation and what it means. And to change their self-talk, like Aurora did (accompanying body language optional but recommended).

And then to attack the work sanely. This means to break it down into the smallest units you can—for example, one article in one section of the literature review. Then the next article, and the next. Or one subhead and one step in it. For the methods chapter in the data collection section, you could create the recruitment letter or flyer, and then the letter to your prospective participants’ organization. Remember too that your university guide for chapters and their subsections often provides a roadmap. Or ask your chair for preferred subheads and referrals to accepted dissertations.

To further help combat students’ feelings of helplessness and befuddlement, I often ask for their plan of attack, based on the guidelines. It helps them to write down, in sequence, what they’re going to do on each chapter and when. Self-imposed deadlines can always be adjusted, and there’s no penalty.

Sometimes it helps too if you talk to another academic or friend who’s been through the fire. You’ll probably be heartened at their confessions of having felt exactly as you do at many points. You might also tell or email them your plan of attack. This action reinforces and redeclares your intention, and you’re inviting accountability.

Yes, the dissertation is big and it’s long and it a great deal of effort, concentration, and discipline. But remind yourself of the benefits of a completed dissertation and doctorate: satisfaction (often of completing a life goal), contribution, prestige, more career opportunities, maybe a promotion, maybe even more money. But it’s still only a project. It’s a project you can complete. Otherwise you wouldn’t be wrestling with it, however many times it’s hammer-locked you.

As Aurora declared, your dissertation does not define you. It may reveal your interests, identify a passion, confirm a desire to contribute, and help you perfect your mastery of scholarly conventions. But it’s a project—and only one of the many you will complete and receive accolades for in your career.

So in moments or days of discouragement when you’re tempted to demolish yourself and throw your dissertation drafts down a well, stand up, put your hands on your hips if you have to, reignite your persistence, and remember that the apparent monster is only a project. You are not your dissertation.

Acknowledgment: With thanks to my colleague KH.
******

Note from Dr. Noelle:
As I delve headfirst into other, long-postponed projects, this is the last of these Dear Dr. Noelle columns. Thank you to my dissertation clients, the TAA staff, all who have suggested questions, and readers. I have enjoyed sharing these columns with you and hope they have helped you and any other suffering doctoral candidates you know. I welcome your questions and comments: graduguides@yahoo.com

Dissertation coach, nurturer, bolsterer, handholder, and editor; scholarly and mainstream writing consultant; author of writing craft, spiritual, and academic articles; and spiritual and motivational counselor, Noelle Sterne has published many pieces in print and online venues, including Author Magazine, Chicken Soup for the Soul, Children’s Book Insider, Graduate Schools Magazine, GradShare, InnerSelf, Inspire Me Today, Transformation Magazine, Unity Magazine, Women in Higher Education, Women on Writing, Writer’s Digest, and The Writer. Noelle’s ninth story for Chicken Soup for the Soul appears in June 2025 in the volume Self-Care Isn’t Selfish. With a Ph.D. from Columbia University, Noelle has for 30 years helped doctoral candidates wrestle their dissertations to completion (finally). Based on her practice, her Challenges in Writing Your Dissertation: Coping with the Emotional, Interpersonal, and Spiritual Struggles (Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2015) addresses students’ often overlooked or ignored but crucial nonacademic difficulties that can seriously prolong their agony. See the PowerPoint teaser here. In Noelle`s Trust Your Life: Forgive Yourself and Go After Your Dreams (Unity Books, 2011), she draws examples from her academic consulting and other aspects of life to help readers release regrets and reach lifelong yearnings. Following one of her own, she is currently working on her third novel. Visit Noelle at www.trustyourlifenow.com

The post Dear Dr. Noelle: Are You Your Dissertation? appeared first on Abstract.

The Fearless Speaker delivers a powerful and proven roadmap for mastering public speaking and transforming fear into focused intentional presence. Drawing on decades of executive leadership, coaching, and academic experience, she guides readers step by step from fear and self-doubt to clarity, confidence, and command. Mackenzie-Ruppel is a professor in the School of Business at Molloy University.

The post TAA Member Maureen Mackenzie-Ruppel Authors New Book appeared first on Abstract.

How Trump’s Admissions-Data Push Burdened Colleges (September 30, 2026)

Higher Ed’s AI Integration Overhyped, New Data Shows (September 30, 2026)

Dartmouth Provost’s ‘AI Dependency’ Sparks Backlash (September 29, 2026)

Trump Administration Formally Rescinds Biden Title IX Rule (September 29, 2026)

The post Industry News Round-Up Week of 9/28/26 appeared first on Abstract.

We want to showcase speakers who can help the authoring community by sharing successful writing tips and strategies to inspire other textbook and/or academic authors at any stage of their career. This is an excellent opportunity to provide a hands-on learning experience as well as network with colleagues and peers through 30- or 60-minute presentations, panel discussions, discussion circles or group mentoring.

We want sessions that take full advantage of being together. Think: Interactive Workshops, Live Q&As and Collaborative Problem Solving on topics such as:

• Artificial intelligence
• Business of authoring
• Collaborating with a coauthor (at the beginning or binging them on)
• Time and Productivity
• Contract Negotiation ……and many others!

Click Here to learn more about submitting a proposal! You will need to create a Cvent account or log in to an existing Cvent account to submit a proposal.

The post Last Chance to Submit a Proposal for TAA’s 2027 Textbook & Academic Authoring Conference! appeared first on Abstract.

“Will a publisher steal my book idea?”
“Will a peer reviewer steal my ideas (data, theory, conclusions, etc.)?

In my Publishing Consulting practice over the last ten years, I get some of the same questions asked over and over again. Common ones are, “Do you know a journal that is interested in my paper on XYZ?” “Do I need an agent to get published?” Or, “Are people still reading books?

I’d gladly address these, but this blog post installment is about the two questions at the top. “Will someone steal my work?” is the easiest way to boil them both down.

I have been in scholarly publishing since 1987 (Yikes!). I oversaw the publishing of more than 20,000 journal articles and 500 textbooks and monographs. Additionally, I’ve been consulting with authors, publishers, and associations over the last ten years.

In my experience both concerns (a publisher stealing your book idea or a peer reviewer stealing your ideas) are extremely remote verging on zero. And they can be made to be infinitesimally small with only a little bit of work. As an author looking to convey your work and thoughts to the marketplace of ideas, there are much bigger worries, such as having your material accepted (rather than theft by others).

Disclaimer: Could this happen? Of course. Has it happened to people in the past? Of course. Is it common practice among reputable book publishers and peer reviewed
journals and their reviewers? In my 39 years of experience, I do not have one direct instance where I spoke with somebody that this happened to. Let's look at each
situation separately.

A Publisher Stealing a Book Idea

It is very unlikely that a reputable publisher would steal your book idea. Established publishers acquire, evaluate, and reject far more proposals than they could ever publish, and their business depends on professional credibility and long-term relationships with authors. But let’s understand what “idea theft” means in publishing.

Copyright law protects your original expression of an idea; not the idea by itself. That includes the actual words you write, your manuscript’s structure, and presentation. Copyright does not protect a concept, theme, or genre. For example, you cannot own the idea of “a textbook in public health addressing underserved populations.” Other academics can independently create books on this topic.

A publisher usually has no practical reason to take an author’s idea and create a competing book. Doing so would require time, staff, and risk. If the proposal is strong enough to publish, it is usually simpler to make an offer to the author who developed it.

Protect yourself sensibly

• Put your work in writing and retain dated drafts, research files, emails, and submission records.
• Submit only to legitimate publishers and agents. Research the company before sending a manuscript: look for a real staff, credible authors, transparent
contracts, distribution information, and a publishing track record.

Do not let fear of idea theft stop you from submitting. Your greatest risk is usually not
that a legitimate publisher will steal your concept; it is that your proposal may be
rejected, ignored, or need stronger positioning.

Peer Reviewers Stealing Your Ideas

In a reputable academic journal, theft of an author’s ideas by a peer reviewer is uncommon and is a serious breach of publication ethics.

A submitted manuscript is treated as confidential communication. Major editorial-ethics guidance states that reviewers must keep the manuscript and its contents confidential, must not publicly discuss it, and must not use or appropriate the authors’ ideas before publication.

A responsible reviewer should: Review the work only for the purpose of evaluating it for the journal; Keep the manuscript, data, methods, etc. confidential; Avoid sharing the manuscript with colleagues, students, or AI tools; Delete/destroy all copies and destroy printed copies after completing the review.

What you can do

You cannot eliminate all risk, but you can protect yourself:

• Keep dated drafts, raw data, laboratory records, research notes, etc.
• Submit to established journals with transparent editorial policies and recognized ethical standards.
• Use a preprint server when appropriate for your field. A public preprint establishes a visible, dated record of your work (although it may affect eligibility at some journals, so check the journal’s policy first).
• In your cover letter, discreetly flag direct competitors or people with relevant conflicts, if the submission system allows author-suggested exclusions.
• Preserve all editorial correspondence and decision letters.

Similarity alone is not proof of theft. Researchers can independently pursue the same question, use similar methods, or reach related conclusions.

If a reviewer appears to have used distinctive unpublished material from your manuscript, document the timeline and evidence. Contact the editor-in-chief or the
publisher’s research-integrity office, not the reviewer directly. Explain the concern factually, identify the specific overlaps, and provide dated supporting materials. Organizations such as COPE provide ethical guidance for handling peer-review issues, including confidentiality and misuse of information obtained during review.

Peer review requires trust, but it is not blind trust. Submit to credible journals, maintain clear records, and understand the journal’s ethics policy. In most cases, the greater challenge is not reviewer theft. It is navigating a fair, rigorous review process and revising your work effectively.

Hit the submit button with a bit more confidence.

(I welcome all feedback and experiences. If you feel otherwise OR if you have firsthand experience, drop a comment in the notes below. Secondhand accounts are just that.)

John Bond is a publishing consultant at Riverwinds Consulting. He is the host of the YouTube channel “Publishing Defined.” His first novel has just been released, To the End of Reckoning, a speculative thriller. Check it out or contact him at jbond@riverwindsconsulting.com.

The post Will a Publisher or Reviewer Steal my Ideas? appeared first on Abstract.