Today, many academics feel stuck between a rock and a hard place. They’re under huge pressure to write and publish but an ever-growing mountain of teaching and admin is stopping them doing just that. Our research finds that whilst nobody is immune to these pressures, some academics cope better than others – and that’s because over the years, they’ve developed personal “systems” to help them write. We recently carried out in-depth interviews with 23 scholars across the UK, Europe and the US. We deliberately chose a diverse group so as to not make any assumptions based on age, seniority, or research background. Academic experience ranged from six months to 27 years and subject fields ranged from social sciences, economics, business, and arts. We did this as part of our user research to inform the development of Prolifiko – a digital coaching tool for writers. Whilst every academic had developed a writing productivity system personal to them, we found there were six common “habits” that the most prolific (and generally least stressed) academics tended to use. 1. They “time-block” their writing in advance Scheduling – booking in time to write in advance – was the single most common habit of our writers. It didn’t appear to matter what type of time-blocking method a scholar chose to use or how lengthy a writing session was. Some blocked out long periods of time on sabbatical, whilst others preferred to block out short, regular times throughout the day or across a week. What seemed to matter far more was the act of planning, as this mentally prepared the individual for writing – and so made the process easier and less stressful. “When I need to write I block out time. I’m lucky in that I can work from home – I block out a couple of straight days to do the writing and I plan it in beforehand. I couldn’t really write in any other way than blocking out that time.” Question: What is most likely the author's job? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Scholar
- Writer
- not enough information
- Researcher
Researcher
--
China’s Defense Ministry said Thursday that a U.S. decision to disinvite China from a major international maritime exercise is “unconstructive.” A ministry statement said despite the decision, China will continue playing a role in “maintaining peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.” The United States announced its move Wednesday, saying Beijing’s “destabilizing behavior” in the South China Sea is inconsistent with the principles of the U.S.-led drill. “China’s continued militarization of disputed features in the South China Sea only serve to raise tensions and destabilize the region,” read a statement from Lt. Col. Christopher Logan, a Pentagon spokesman. The statement said that disinviting China from the 2018 RIMPAC is an “initial” response to Beijing’s South China Sea activities. It did not specify what other steps may be taken. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said China’s activity in the South China Sea was for self-defense and that it was a “much smaller scale” than what the United States had done in Hawaii and Guam. “We hope that the U.S. will change such a negative mindset,” he said at a joint news conference with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Since 2014, China has taken part in RIMPAC, the world’s largest international maritime drill, which is held every two years in Hawaii. It’s a reflection of expanding U.S.-China military ties, despite tensions over Beijing’s construction of man-made islands in the South China Sea, some of which have been militarized. "We have strong evidence that China has deployed anti-ship missiles, surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, and electronic jammers to contested features in the Spratly Islands region of the South China Sea. China's landing bomber aircraft at Woody Island has also raised tensions," the Pentagon statement said. "We have called on China to remove the military systems immediately and to reverse course on the militarization of disputed South China Sea features," the statement added. "We believe these recent deployments and the continued... Question: After the end of the text, how will the public view of China's military change? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- they may not be seen as trustworthy
- not enough information
- they will be seen as breaking their agreement not to militarize the Spratly islands
- they may not be asked back to RIMPAC
they will be seen as breaking their agreement not to militarize the Spratly islands
--
When I had trouble bending over to tie my shoes and I wasn’t pregnant. When I hit about 35 I started having trouble with weight. The strange thing was to me, it wasn’t that I was eating more then I used to, as a matter of fact I started eating less. When that didn’t help I barely ate at all. Still I couldn’t lose weight. What I didn’t know was we start to lose muscle mass every decade beginning in our thirties, and I was a ripe 35. Muscles use up more calories than fat, so less muscle means a slower metabolism and the need for fewer calories, and the pounds stack on easier. My second problem was my narcolepsy. When you wake up after a nights sleep there is a release of adrenaline which prompts body and mind into action and helps burn off calories. Narcolepsy causes me to sleep on and off during the day, and as explained by my doctor (so if I have this wrong about adrenaline it is my doctors fault lol) I am not getting that adrenaline release because my bodies clock doesn’t know if I am asleep or awake. He suggested in the morning to start exercising about 20 minutes to get that adrenaline rush, in the afternoon exercise about twenty minutes more for the same reason… Dieting and exercising brought those pounds back down. I will say it is much harder in the winter for me then in the summer. Summer time I am naturally active. I ride bikes with my husband, swim, garden, mow about an acre of lawn. In the winter I can’t ride, swim, garden, or mow, and I hate exercise I don’t enjoy. Anyway the long answer to the defining moment but there it is just the same. Question: Who's second problem was narcolepsy? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- the woman's child
- not enough information
- the woman telling the story
- the woman's husband

the woman telling the story
--