By Peggy L. Chinn, PhD, RN, FAAN
Writer’s Camp Senior Counselor
Abstract
In the early 1990s, a template outlining the “Cs” of good scholarship was created for PhD students, evolving from 13 to 16 key traits. These contrasting characteristics promote a comprehensive understanding of scholarship. The concepts emphasize diverse perspectives, substantial content, and the importance of originality, credibility, and ethics in scholarly work.
Let me share an idea that has taken on a life of its own.
In the early 1990s, I created a “template” to use in discussing the characteristics of good scholarship with the PhD students at the University of Colorado. I was the Director of the Program and organized monthly noon-hour gatherings to discuss dimensions of scholarship that are not typically included in the formal doctoral level curricula. The handout I developed dealt with “13 Cs,” and in short order made its way around the world, given that a number of students were from other countries. Subsequently, I regularly received requests for copies of the handout. So in my Editorial1 in Advances in Nursing Science, 1999, Vol 22, No 2, I published a version of it, which by then had grown to 16 Cs! I also posted it on the ANS Journal blog in 2011,2 and now it is posted here. It is interesting to think about things that we write that “grow legs” and travel through time and space. You never know in advance which articles will become “best sellers,” but what I thought was a simple handout has certainly taken on a life of its own.
The “Cs” are shown in pairs representing contrasting traits that we seek in the best of scholarship. Some of the pairs seem like contradictions, but in fact, they have a yin/yang relationship. Neither side of the coin is complete without the other. It is this tension that sustains scholarship!
| Conflict Present a complete diversity of points of view on your topic, summarizing the major perspectives you have found, and explaining in your own words how each point of view is plausible. Keep coming back to the question: “So what?” to lead the reader through the maze of differences of opinion. | Commonalities Summarize in your own words the common elements in the existing literature. Highlight what is important about the commonalities for your work. Show the reader any traceable influence from one author to another. Integrate your ideas as you develop the common “picture.” |
| Content Substantive content is fundamental. Focus on the main message and show how it is important to the discipline. Open and close with a clear statement of your message, and make sure that everything in between builds toward that message. | Context Scholarly ideas do not occur in a vacuum. Provide a sense of the context in which your ideas have emerged. If you are taking issue with the ideas of others, explain the context in which the others’ ideas emerged, showing respect for the importance of diversity in the development of the discipline. |
Credited Use the literature in your area to show influences on your ideas. Give credit to the works that you are drawing on as predecessors to yours. Always use primary sources unless your purpose is to show the influence of one author on another. Show the reader how your perspective differs from what precedes you. | Creative Your voice must be present. Focus on how your voice differs from other authors in the field. Begin by having a clear, single statement of your main message, and keep returning to that idea as you build your text. Make sure the reader gets the point you are making. |
| Credible Factual and interpretive content must be accurate, plausible, and well-founded. Have informed reviewers check your work for accuracy of facts, distortions of original meanings, or inadvertent misrepresentations of other authors’ works, especially if your content is largely interpretive. | Critical Scholarly writing takes nothing as given, not even an author’s own ideas. Maintain an open, searching posture, seeking new possibilities and understandings. If you think that your idea is “better” than the ideas of other scholars, state your perspective along with an explicit or implied invitation to the reader for ongoing critical dialogue. |
| Current Always include the most current sources that address the topic in your field. If you have looked for current literature and are absolutely sure that none exists, include text that assesses the “state of the art” in your field, and explain why you are taking up this topic in the absence of any current interest in it. PS: Before you conclude that there is no current literature on a topic, make sure you ask a librarian for help with your search, if you have not already done so. | Classic Classic sources are those that have been around for a while and that continue to be consistently cited in your field. Find classic literature by noticing what is frequently cited in the current literature, and by noticing if the more experienced scholars in your discipline know and talk about a particular source or author. |
| Comprehensive Take every step possible to cover the breadth of ideas related to the topic you are developing. Ask colleagues who know the field to critique your early drafts to help you identify any oversights you have made in terms of major ideas, or important literature that needs to be acknowledged. | Concise Keep revising your drafts to make sure you are getting to the point, and that you eliminate repetitive ideas and phrases. Beware of entire sections that wander away from the main purpose of your paper. Maintain a focus on your main idea as you weave subtopics, background, and context together. Keep asking yourself: “Is this necessary to include?” |
| Clear As you near a final draft, be sure that you have used the simplest words possible to convey your meaning. If you must retain (keep) a technical or professional word, make sure that this word is essential to convey your meaning. Edit long sentences that obscure your flow of thought or that confuse your meaning. Ask reviewers to point out any passages where your meaning is not clear. | Complex Use transitions to weave a tapestry of many meanings together to form a whole. As you rewrite, trace the flow of ideas to make sure that you have covered all the essential material needed to address your topic to its fullest, and that you have not robbed your presentation of the richness it requires. Lead the reader from one point to another with explanatory passages and bridges that keep focusing on and building your main point. |
| Courageous Good scholarship takes risks; it brings to the discipline ideas that are original and unique, and that may challenge preconceived notions that prevail. Your courageous ideas must have a foundation, but move away from saying the same old things over again; instead, focus on those new and challenging ideas that challenge the status quo. | Conscientious Make sure that your new ideas have a solid foundation, have been well tested either logically or empirically, and meet the highest ethical standards. You have the burden of convincing your audience that your ideas are worthy of consideration. |
References
- Chinn PL. From the Editor: Scholarship: The Paradoxes of the 14 Cs. Advances in Nursing Science, 22(2): v-vi.
- Chinn PL. The “Cs” of Scholarship. Advances in Nursing Science Blog, 2011, April 7. https://ansjournalblog.com/2011/04/07/the-cs-of-scholarship/
©2025 Writer’s Camp and Peggy L. Chinn. Licensed under CC-BY-ND 4.0
Author: Peggy L. Chinn
Editor: Leslie H. Nicoll
Citation: Chinn PL. Writer’s Camp Care Package: The “Cs” of Scholarship. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 1(1):10. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.15490935