THE PROBLEM
Why nobody reads your paper properly before it counts
You send it to your supervisor, who comments on the formatting. To a co-author drowning in their own semester. To a friendly colleague, who says “reads well!” because that’s what colleagues say.
So the first genuinely close reading your paper gets is from Reviewer 2, fourteen months later — from someone with no context on what you were trying to do, and no obligation to be kind about it.
The questions that actually decide whether a paper lands are the ones you can’t ask a reviewer, your supervisor, or your department without it costing you something:
Those get answered in conversation — with people who’ve read a lot of papers, written a lot of reviews, and have no stake in flattering you.
WHAT THIS IS
A reading group, in reverse.
The usual academic reading group discusses finished work by people who aren’t in the room. Paper Club discusses unfinished work by the people who are.
Deliberately small: two or three pieces of work per session, circulated in advance, each with a proper slot — long enough to get past first impressions into the structure of the thing.
Feedback from multiple perspectives
Dominik — a full professor with an accomplished, interdisciplinary research background who also edits international journals — comments alongside peers on the same piece.
Peers who read like reviewers
Everyone in the room is doing the same work, which means they spot the moves you’re making and the ones you’re avoiding.
You learn most from papers that aren’t yours
Watching someone else’s manuscript get taken apart carefully, with reasoning explained out loud, teaches you more about your own writing than any style guide.
HOW A SESSION RUNS
Prepared, structured, focused.
1
Before
Whoever’s presenting circulates their material in advance. Everyone reads it — the depth only exists because the reading already happened.
2
The framing
The author opens — never with “what do you think?” but “here’s what this is trying to do, here’s where I’m stuck.” Vague requests get vague feedback, so the ask gets sharpened before the discussion starts.
3
The discussion
The group works through the piece — argument first, then structure, then details. We go where the problem is, not through a checklist. Structured input covers: contribution and positioning, journal fit, and review-readiness.
4
The close
The author says what they’re changing — out loud, specifically. Feedback that doesn’t end in a decision is just conversation.
WHAT YOU CAN BRING
What to bring to Paper Club — it doesn’t have to be finished
Earlier is usually better — the most expensive mistakes are framing mistakes, and by the time the prose is polished, they’ve already been made.
THE WHO THIS IS FOR
Come if. Don’t come if.
Come if.
Don’t come if.
Frequently Asked Questions
No. Presenting slots are limited to two or three per session, so most people attend and read more often than they present — a low-pressure way to see how the group works first.
“Not ready” is usually the best time. A session about what the paper’s even about, or where to send it, is more useful than one about a manuscript where every decision is already locked in.
A manuscript or two, read once, properly — roughly an hour. Can’t do the reading? Come anyway, but say so.
Yes. Everything discussed stays in the group. Nothing is recorded or circulated outside the session.
No. Peer review is a gatekeeping judgment for someone else’s benefit. This is formative feedback for yours — the goal is a better paper, not a verdict.
Sessions run in English. Bring work in either — say which when you sign up.
The group is interdisciplinary — usually an advantage. Most manuscripts fail on things that travel across fields: an unclear contribution, a mismatch between question and method. An outside reader also notices jargon you’ve stopped seeing.
Co-Writing is where the work gets done. Paper Club is where it gets read. Individual coaching is where you decide what to do with your career. Many people use two of the three.
Included in the Academic Freedom Lab membership.