The CORE Econ website uses essential cookies to make our website work. You may disable these using your browser settings but this may affect website functionality (such as your access to logged-in resources). We would also like to use analytics cookies to help us improve the functionality of our website and improve your user experience. These analytics cookies will be set only if you accept. We do not sell or otherwise transfer personal data or usage data to any third parties or use it for any other purpose. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, see our Privacy policy.

Writing and structuring new publications

Important background: Information design

Information design is a key foundational step in the process of creating learning material. Predictability, repeatability, and consistency are particularly important factors in creating the kind of relatable structure which will encourage and facilitate learning. Organizing information in a consistent and purposeful way ensures that the reader can easily access, engage with, and understand it while reading.

Working within an organizational framework involves:

  • structuring information into logical topics (for example, units) that follow a predictable flow from beginning to end
  • breaking information within topics into manageable chunks (for example, sections and subsections) by using a system of headings or other meaningful visual elements to indicate the hierarchy and levels of organization of the content
  • employing a consistent name and visual design for each repeated element or feature (for example, exercise, figure).

To ensure that the organizational framework is followed, the development editor for a project may create and provide an author template for the authors to work into, as a Google Doc (example from Experiencing Economics).

While some publications may be organized in a unique way, the general framework which is likely to be applicable to most CORE publications is outlined in the next section.

Organizational framework

At the highest level, the book’s content is organized into units. Exceptions are Experiencing Economics which uses ‘experiments’ as ‘units’, and Doing Economics which uses tool-specific ‘projects’ as ‘units’.

Whatever the name given to a unit, these are broken down into sections, subsections, and even sub-subsections. Features are interspersed throughout the content.

Units

Units are numbered sequentially throughout a publication.

The unit’s title should be formatted as a first-level heading (heading 1/‘h1’) to indicate its position in the information hierarchy.

Sections and subsections

Units are broken into sections.

Section headings should be formatted as second-level headings (heading 2/‘h2’) to indicate their position in the information hierarchy.

Section headings do much of the work of breaking the content up into manageable chunks as well as guiding the reader through the material.

With the exception of introductory sections in The Economy 1.0, Doing Economics, and CORE Insights, all section titles should be numbered sequentially by unit and section number (for example, starting at 1.1 for Unit 1 in general CORE publications, or starting at 1.1 for the first section after the introduction in Unit 1 Doing Economics, for example). Closing sections, such as conclusions and references, are numbered in the same way.

The number of sections per unit will be guided by the content of the unit and is at the authors’ discretion.

Each section may be further organized into:

  • subsections: not numbered, formatted as third-level headings (heading 3/‘h3’)
  • sub-subsections: not numbered, formatted as fourth-level headings (heading 4/‘h4’)
  • and so on.

Features

Features are elements that are used consistently throughout the publication for a specific pedagogic purpose.

They are assigned a name (for cross-referencing, tagging, and coding purposes) and given a unique visual design to set them apart from the other body text.

For features that include headings, such as exercises and multiple-choice questions, format the heading as a heading level 3/‘h3’.

A full description of each feature in the CORE set, its purpose and how to indicate each one within your manuscript is included in the feature set section.

Writing tone and style

CORE publications use clear and inclusive language. Aim for the following as you write:

Structure

  • Form a narrative.
  • Create cohesive content for each unit.
  • Organize content so that it flows logically.
  • Break content into short sections, using headings to guide the reader.
  • Keep in mind possibilities for modularization (for example, Building Blocks are self-contained sections that help students understand fundamental concepts, even if they have not read the full unit).

Writing style

  • Focus on the clarity of your writing.
  • Explain concepts in a way that is understandable to the planned audience, keeping in mind that (depending on the project) they may be new to the subject.
  • Consider the length of your sentences and paragraphs. Avoid them being overly long, particularly when explaining difficult concepts, but generally it is best to use a mix of different lengths throughout the unit, as appropriate.
  • Use transitions to link concepts, sentences, or paragraphs.
  • Use an engaging, encouraging, and conversational tone. Refer directly to the reader, using ‘you’ or ‘your’ in the conversational style. Use ‘we’ in examples like ‘In this section we will …’ or ‘We would expect …’.
  • Generally use the active voice.

Accessibility and inclusion

  • Aim to use inclusive language.
  • Use gender-neutral language where possible, and avoid games or thought experiments which divide groups into genders.
  • Ensure that the content is perceivable in some way to everyone, even if readers are colourblind, using a black and white screen, or using a screen-reader to read the content to them, for example:
    • Information on any images must be described in alt text (written descriptions of figures) for those using screen-readers. Alt text should be provided below the image in the manuscript with the tag ‘[Alt text]’ placed before the relevant text, to indicate to editors what this is. CORE provides further guidance on writing alt text, as well as examples.
    • Avoid relying solely on colour as an indicator of meaning. For example, instead of referring to ‘the red line’, add labels to the line and refer to it as ‘the red line, AB’. This may require you to add labelling to graphs.
    • Video content must include closed captions and be available in a transcript in a separate .txt file.
    • In general, think of alternative ways readers could access your content depending on their abilities and devices. For example, graphs should be described in alt text, and where they are data-based, should have linked data which someone could explore with a keyboard.
    • Consider putting any mathematical calculations in body text and not on graphs, since complex text on graphs is often not perceivable on different screens and bears repeating or including solely in the body text where everyone can access it.
    • Use the correct symbols. When screen-readers read out ‘-15%’ they will say ‘dash fifteen percent’ because a hyphen has been used instead of the correct Unicode symbol for the minus sign, ‘−’. Using Unicode symbols for special characters ensures that screen-readers can tell what your text is actually saying (not just what it looks like), and can relay that information to the people using them.
  • Avoid saying ‘as you can see’ or ‘we saw’, as these imply the ability of sight or an assumed comprehension which some readers might not have. Some examples of ways to revise these kinds of phrases include: ‘Figure X shows that’, ‘consider’, ‘as we discussed’, or ‘refer to’.
  • Use examples of characters that represent human diversity, but be wary of unintended implications when referring to specific races/colours or countries.
  • Refer to the CORE house style (any suggested updates are welcome, sent to EBW or CORE). Some helpful rules from that style guide include, for example, not to say ‘Click here’ when linking to something; and to refer to ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ axes instead of ‘x-axis’ and ‘y-axis’.

Writing the best draft possible

Creating the best possible draft of the content based on CORE’s brief is time-consuming, and will likely need to be a team effort during which several people are working on different elements at the same time. Some elements will require a consistent presentation throughout the book, necessitating the use of specialists (see ‘Extensions’ below). This was the approach taken for The Economy, which can be adapted to suit each publication’s particular needs:

  • Unit text: Was written by the unit authors (including the ‘How economists learn from facts’, ‘When economists disagree’ sections). All units in The Economy open with a “hook”, a real-life story that interests readers and illustrates the big themes of the unit.
  • Multiple choice questions (MCQs): Were usually written by the authors, with occasional assistance from external lecturers. Note, these are harder than they seem, and need to be carefully reviewed so that they are correct, make sense, use consistent language, and cannot be misinterpreted. Authors with experience in setting exam papers will find it easier to create MCQs. It is not a job that can be delegated to a PhD intern, for example.
  • Great Economist boxes: Were written by a consistent, dedicated team for all units.
  • Figures: For data figures, datasets were supplied by the authors or their researchers. The CORE data editor then created these in the CORE style, and EBW created and incorporated the image files. For non-data figures (analytical diagrams) drafts were created in PowerPoint or Excel by authors or their researchers, which were treated as a brief for creation of the artwork by EBW.
  • Exercises: As for the unit text, the authors were asked to write the exercises. They were checked by the interns, Eileen Tipoe, Jane Archer, and the development editor. Where authors didn’t supply exercises, the interns and Eileen produced them.
  • Extensions: Were created by Margaret Stevens, because they form a separate treatment of the material that must be consistent with the tone and ideas of the main text. In The Economy 1.0, the ‘Extension’ feature was called ‘Leibniz’. The first beta of The Economy 1.0 outsourced Leibnizes, and the results were mathematically precise but not consistent with our tone or notation. Also note that someone has to code all equations in LaTeX!
  • Economist in Action videos: Were prepared and edited by Econ Films, with heavy involvement by the authors/academic editors on preparing the ‘script’ and post-production review.

Additionally, you will need teaching guides and lecture slides. This is a demanding task that needs to work from edited text and finished figures. Accordingly, it can be slotted in closer to the end of the cycle, or even during publication.