Course content

Course content

Reaching the research frontier in engineering and technology requires more than "reading a lot": it requires a structured, transparent, and critical state-of-the-art review that maps what is known, what is debated, and where the most credible research gaps and opportunities lie. This course equips PhD candidates to arrive at the forefront of their specific research domain by designing, documenting, and writing a state-of-the-art review that can serve as both (i) a strategic foundation for the PhD project and (ii) a submission-ready publication (or near submission-ready manuscript with a clear submission plan). The use of specialized AI-tools will form an integral part of the course.

The course combines review methodology, analytical synthesis, and scientific writing and revision, with continuous work on participants’ own topics.

Core topics

• Writing as a process: planning, drafting, revising, and sustaining progress
• Review design for state of the art: framing, boundaries, review questions, and transparent procedures (search, screening, documentation)
• Building the "storyline": problem framing, research questions, contribution claims, and argumentation
• Analytical synthesis: comparison frameworks, concept matrices, taxonomies, and trend/gap mapping
• Article and thesis genres: review articles, IMRaD where relevant, article-based theses, and monographs (as applicable)
• Reproducibility, assumptions, uncertainty, limitations
• Reference practice, authorship, and publication ethics
• Journal selection and submission strategy
• Peer review: responding to reviewers, revision plans, and resubmission tactics
• Collaborative writing

Learning outcome

Knowledge

The candidate:

• has knowledge of principles, conventions, and quality criteria for state-of-the-art (SotA) review writing in engineering and technology
• is familiar with review genres and review designs relevant to PhD work (e.g., state-of-the-art reviews, mapping/scoping reviews, structured/systematic approaches as appropriate) and how these differ from primary research articles and thesis formats
• has knowledge of key stages and requirements in the scholarly publishing process for review-based manuscripts, including journal selection, peer review, revision, and resubmission

Skills

The candidate:

• can define and justify the scope and boundaries of a research field and formulate review questions that enable a credible state-of-the-art account
• can design and document a transparent review process (search strategy, screening/inclusion logic, and synthesis approach) appropriate to the research domain
• can critically assess and synthesise literature to identify dominant approaches, debates, trends, and research gaps, and translate these into a clear research agenda
• can plan, draft, and revise a submission-ready state-of-the-art based manuscript (or near submission-ready with a clear submission plan), improving structure, clarity, precision, and cohesion in technical writing
• can adapt the manuscript to a defined target journal/venue and intended audience
• can give constructive peer feedback and use feedback to improve own synthesis and writing
• can prepare a submission package (e.g., journal fit rationale, abstract refinement, cover letter, compliance checklist, and a draft response-to-reviewers)

General competence

The candidate:

• can position their own PhD project at the forefront of the research field by using a defensible state-of-the-art review to clarify contributions, assumptions, and relevance
• can communicate a complex research landscape clearly and critically to both specialist and adjacent audiences, using appropriate structure and visualisations (e.g., taxonomies, concept matrices, evidence tables)
• can evaluate the maturity and direction of a research domain and formulate a credible research agenda (gaps, opportunities, and pathways for future work) based on the synthesis
• can apply responsible research and publication practices in literature-based scholarship, including transparent documentation, balanced representation of evidence, and proper citation/authorship practices
• can participate in and contribute to scholarly communities through peer review practices and collaborative writing workflows, including managing revision cycles toward publication

Learning methods and activities

Target group / admission:

The course is primarily aimed at PhD candidates at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering). If capacity allows, candidates from other departments and/or faculties may be admitted.

The course combines structured teaching with supervised writing and peer-based revision, reflecting formats used in NTNU doctoral writing and dissemination courses.

Participants should be actively working on a journal manuscript based on their own research material.

Activities:

• interactive lectures and short demonstrations
• writing "sprints" and guided revision sessions
• small-group peer review and editorial workshops

Participation requirement: minimum 80% attendance in scheduled sessions. The course may be cancelled if there are too few participants.

Compulsory assignments

• Pre-course work
• Peer review
• Revision plan
• Attendance in sessions

Specific conditions

Required previous knowledge

• Admission to a PhD program (or equivalent doctoral-level status)
• Access to material needed for writing (data/results/analyses sufficient to draft a manuscript or chapter)

Course materials

A curated reading pack will be provided (articles, checklists, templates).