Penguatan Kompetensi Penulisan dan Editing Buku Melalui Workshop Produksi Naskah untuk Publikasi Profesional
Keywords:
book writing, editing, workshop, professional publication, ; academic literacyAbstract
Writing a high-quality book requires more than writing skills; it also involves the ability to develop a coherent structure, build strong arguments, manage references, conduct editing, understand academic ethics, and navigate the publication process. Participants faced several challenges, including unclear book positioning, unsystematic manuscript structures, weak connections among ideas, limited editing skills, and suboptimal and unethical use of artificial intelligence (AI). This community service program aimed to improve participants’ competencies in transforming ideas into structured book manuscript plans that could be further developed for professional publication. The program was conducted through a practice-based workshop consisting of 70% practical activities and 30% theoretical instruction. The activities included determining ideas and positioning using the Who–Why–What–How approach, developing a book blueprint and book structure, constructing CEEEAT-based paragraphs, managing references, using AI as a co-pilot, conducting three levels of editing, and preparing a One Book Starter Package. Evaluation was conducted through observation, product assessment, participant reflection, and pre- and post-activity assessments. The results show that the manuscript production approach helped participants develop book plans more systematically and clarify the target readers, positioning, structure, and publication strategy.
References
Balida, D. A. R., Guillergan, V. V., & Hapinat, H. L. (2023). The effects of workshop intervention on research writing skills. Russian Law Journal, 11(3). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.52783/rlj.v11i3.2045
Bittle, K., & El-Gayar, O. (2025). Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Information, 16(4), 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040296
Cahapay, M. (2021). Kirkpatrick model: Its limitations as used in higher education evaluation. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(1), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.21449/IJATE.856143
Campbell, C. W., & Batista, B. (2023). To peer or not to peer: A controlled peer-editing intervention measuring writing self-efficacy in South Korean higher education. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 4, 100218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100218
Dabis, A., & Csáki, C. (2024). AI and ethics: Investigating the first policy responses of higher education institutions to the challenge of generative AI. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 1006. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03526-z
Darowski, E. S., Helder, E., & Patson, N. D. (2022). Explicit writing instruction in synthesis: Combining in-class discussion and an online tutorial. Teaching of Psychology, 49(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320979899
Hassan, S., Venkateswaran, S. P., & Nadarajah, V. D. (2021). Evaluation of immediate impact of faculty development programme using a pretest–post-test study design format. Innovation and Education, 3, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42862-021-00009-9
Ibarra, F. P., Setiawan, H., & Mukminin, A. (2023). Developing an academic writing creativity and self-efficacy among Indonesian TVET instructors: Evaluating an online genre analysis-based academic writing workshop. Cogent Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2237319
LaPaglia, J. A. (2026). Writing workshops in a research methods course. Teaching of Psychology, 53(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241292358
Mahapatra, S. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: A mixed methods intervention study. Smart Learning Environments, 11, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00295-9
Patria, B., & Laili, L. (2021). Writing group program reduces academic procrastination: A quasi-experimental study. BMC Psychology, 9, 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00665-9
Rentier, E. S. (2025). To use or not to use: Exploring the ethical implications of using generative AI in academic writing. AI and Ethics, 5(3), 3421–3425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00649-6
Watson, S., Brezovec, E., & Romic, J. (2025). The role of generative AI in academic and scientific authorship: An autopoietic perspective. AI & Society, 40, 3225–3235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02174-w
Williams, R. T. (2024). The ethical implications of using generative chatbots in higher education. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1331607. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1331607
Wu, C., Zhang, Y.-W., & Li, A. W. (2023). Peer feedback and Chinese medical students’ English academic writing development: A longitudinal intervention study. BMC Medical Education, 23, 578. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04574-w
Yusuf, A., Pervin, N., & Román-González, M. (2024). Generative AI and the future of higher education: A threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00453-6
Zhang, H., Shulgina, G., Fanguy, M., & Costley, J. (2022). Online peer editing: Effects of comments and edits on academic writing skills. Heliyon, 8(7), e09822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09822
Zlotnikova, I. (2025). Establishing ethical standards for GenAI in university education: A roadmap for academic integrity and fairness. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 23(2), 188–216. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-07-2024-0104
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Eko Sudarmanto, Irwan Irawadi Barus , Mutia Pamikatsih , Muhamad Habibullah AR , Arman Paramansyah , Sri Fatimah Rahmatillah , Iskandar, Yuni Ekawati

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.












