Well,

If by "student" you mean a bachelor or master student, I would certainly say that there is very little gain in forcing them to try to publish scientific papers. Why? Because they know too little, and they need first to understand what science is, what a research project is, what it means to write a scientific paper, how to write a good scientific paper, and so on. And - importantly - they need to know all about what already exists!

If you force a student - before her/his master degree - to try to publish anything, then it will surely be a rather bland and poor paper, with very little progress of science as a result. (Unless you - as a supervisor - in fact write the paper for the student, which is very bad practice, and is banned.) This practice should always be avoided! [And I mean that VERY strongly.]

I always stress the need for a student to FIRST study the literature (both in detail and more widely) - from PhD courses, then in books and articles - both in the field wherein she/he will contribute in the future, and tutorials more generally on how to write scientific articles, BEFORE the student is ready to write anything towards a scientific publication.

One natural way to start is to guide the student in the writing of a survey of a field near the one which the student is supposed to contribute in the future. In that process she/he will learn not only about the subject, but - importantly - also HOW scientific literature is structured (including how to write a GOOD literature review), how to find related literature, and so on.

Scientific articles should be written in a scientific manner - otherwise we would not call it "science", right? And since the typical student has NOT been informed very much about what constitutes science, in particular how to contribute with NEW science, there must be a sufficiently long and well-planned upbringing in that area, BEFORE the student tries to contribute her/his own knowledge. (Before you inform others - you have to inform yourself!)

One should hence NOT force a new PhD student to try to write a paper very quickly. It is counterproductive in so many ways, and the paper will nearly always be a quite bad one. And there are already too many bad papers in the world. 

Conclusion: Don't force new students to quickly write papers - it's bad practice and may often result in bad (or even no) science. In contrast - with good guidance in what science is, where the state-of-the-art is, an array of already published articles in the field and/or nearby fields, and good guidance from books on scientific writing, and showing the student very good examples of good writing in the field, you will be able to guide the student towards a very good writing practice. That will give your student a very good start, and will have a life-long effect as well. If you have more than one student in a group doing similar things, you can without much effort set up a system in which students present recent papers to each other, to discuss how papers are structured, and why, how the presentation of results are made - and the variations that they see - which papers are considered good (and why they are good) or not. That system will have very good, and long-lasting, effects. 

Good luck!

Dear colleague

it’s important for students to incorporate graduate school productively in the context of their careers. Career paths are often unknown and can always change, but graduate school is a great time to explore options and to develop skills for prospective careers. Whether you are interested in a career in academia, industry, teaching, or science communication (among many possibilities), try to obtain relevant experience during graduate school: grant writing, entrepreneurial projects, guest lecturing, outreach, writing for nonspecialists, and so on. Graduate school should be a time for students to progress toward their individual goals. But since most PIs are biased toward the academic path, you probably will need to gain exposure on your own to nonacademic routes.

Regards 

Well,

If by "student" you mean a bachelor or master student, I would certainly say that there is very little gain in forcing them to try to publish scientific papers. Why? Because they know too little, and they need first to understand what science is, what a research project is, what it means to write a scientific paper, how to write a good scientific paper, and so on. And - importantly - they need to know all about what already exists!

If you force a student - before her/his master degree - to try to publish anything, then it will surely be a rather bland and poor paper, with very little progress of science as a result. (Unless you - as a supervisor - in fact write the paper for the student, which is very bad practice, and is banned.) This practice should always be avoided! [And I mean that VERY strongly.]

I always stress the need for a student to FIRST study the literature (both in detail and more widely) - from PhD courses, then in books and articles - both in the field wherein she/he will contribute in the future, and tutorials more generally on how to write scientific articles, BEFORE the student is ready to write anything towards a scientific publication.

One natural way to start is to guide the student in the writing of a survey of a field near the one which the student is supposed to contribute in the future. In that process she/he will learn not only about the subject, but - importantly - also HOW scientific literature is structured (including how to write a GOOD literature review), how to find related literature, and so on.

Scientific articles should be written in a scientific manner - otherwise we would not call it "science", right? And since the typical student has NOT been informed very much about what constitutes science, in particular how to contribute with NEW science, there must be a sufficiently long and well-planned upbringing in that area, BEFORE the student tries to contribute her/his own knowledge. (Before you inform others - you have to inform yourself!)

One should hence NOT force a new PhD student to try to write a paper very quickly. It is counterproductive in so many ways, and the paper will nearly always be a quite bad one. And there are already too many bad papers in the world. 

Conclusion: Don't force new students to quickly write papers - it's bad practice and may often result in bad (or even no) science. In contrast - with good guidance in what science is, where the state-of-the-art is, an array of already published articles in the field and/or nearby fields, and good guidance from books on scientific writing, and showing the student very good examples of good writing in the field, you will be able to guide the student towards a very good writing practice. That will give your student a very good start, and will have a life-long effect as well. If you have more than one student in a group doing similar things, you can without much effort set up a system in which students present recent papers to each other, to discuss how papers are structured, and why, how the presentation of results are made - and the variations that they see - which papers are considered good (and why they are good) or not. That system will have very good, and long-lasting, effects. 

Good luck!

It does not seem such a good idea to ask students to write research papers before they don't even know what research is; it will lead to failure as they are not prepared. On the contrary, they need to be very well prepared for such an endeavour by being given very good examples to read and summarize, and guides on scientific writing.

So: Prepare them by giving them related - and the very best - scientific papers as part of the course curriculum, and ask them to read them, digest them, and summarise their contents. Eventually, they will be able to learn what good science is, and tell that apart from bad science. 

I think, scientists and researchers should know nothing about scientific writings. To do research and to get results must be important for them. For scientific writings about those results, each institution must have separate English language writing section. 

The path described by Dr. Michael Patriksson is absolutely practical. I pay my heartiest regards to respected Dr. Michael for presenting such valuable guidelines and conclusions.

I used to start with my graduate students with data taken from some researchers, i give them the data and ask students to look to the ANOVA reported  below data, then start asking students about conclusions could be obtained from data in question, after getting that conclusion, relying on those results, i ask them again to draw a recommendation ! so, students will be able to differentiate between, results, conclusion

and recommendation . This is so important for a students just started learning science! 

Thank for your answers partners. There different points of view in this topic; however, I consider that the most important is that students need to learn how to publish the results of investigations in scientific journals.

In this way, is very important to read scientific articles because the students that read scientific articles have have more possibilities of publishing. Without the publication of scientific articles the science is lost.

Los estudiantes necesitan que se les enseñe a investigar y por ende a publicar los resultados emanados de sus investigaciones. He aquí una propuesta muy acertada...

Article Desarrollo e implementación de un curso de investigación par...