210 likes | 295 Vues
Learn about ethical issues, the review process, and strategies for submitting, revising, and regrouping in academic publishing.
E N D
How To Get Published:Guidance From Emerging and Senior ScholarsEthical Issues and Understanding the Review ProcessPatricia B. ElmoreSouthern Illinois University April 16, 2012 Vancouver, BC, CANADA
Editing and Reviewing Experience Editor or Co-Editor Educational Researcher Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research Editorial Boards American Educational Research Journal – Section on Teaching Learning and Human Development Applied Measurement in Education Educational and Psychological Measurement Journal of Educational Psychology Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development
Strategies for Getting Published • Ethical Issues & Reporting Standards • The Review Process • Submitting a Manuscript • Understanding the Review Process • Deciphering the Editor’s Letter • Revising and Resubmitting the Manuscript • Regrouping after Rejection
What You Need to Know About Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper “Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper” American Physiological Society, 2008
What You Need to Know About Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper “Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper” American Physiological Society, 2008
What You Need to Know About Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper “Ethical Issues When Writing a Scientific Paper” American Physiological Society, 2008
AERA Code of Ethics American Educational Research Association. (2011). Code of Ethics. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 145-156.
AERA Standards Reporting Research Findings American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33-40.
AERA Standards Reporting Research Findings Two overarching principles: “First, reports of empirical research should be warranted; that is, adequate evidence should be provided to justify the results and conclusions” (p. 33)
AERA Standards Reporting Research Findings “Second, reports of empirical research should be transparent; that is, reporting should make explicit the logic of inquiry and activities that led from the development of the initial interest topic, problem or research question; through the definition, collection, and analysis of empirical data or evidence; the articulated outcomes of the study” (p. 33)
AERA Standards Reporting Research Findings American Educational Research Association. (2009). Standards for reporting on humanities-oriented research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 38(6), 481-486.
Journal Guidelines Do NOT Deviate from Published Manuscript Submission Guidelines • Style Specified—APA, MLA, Chicago • Manuscript Length—Word Count • Abstract Length and Form • Tables, Figures, and Illustrations
APA Publication Manual American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Understanding the Review Process Basic Structure of Most Journals Selection of Editors Appointment of Editorial Board Members Professional Associations Sponsoring Journals Provide • Guidelines for Editors and Authors • Ethical Standards of Association • Publication Committee for Oversight
Understanding the Review Process Manuscripts Assigned to Reviewers Length of Time Between • Receipt of Manuscript and Assignment to Reviewers • Assignment to Reviewers and Receipt of Review • Receipt of Review and Editor’s Decision
Understanding the Review Process Complications Mean Delays Reviewers Agree to Review But • Ignore Reminders • Send Review Weeks or Months Late • Never Complete Review Inconsistent Recommendations by Reviewers May Require Assignment to New Reviewers
Deciphering the Editor’s Letter Editor’s Decision Accept Accept with Minor Revisions • Usually for Editor’s Review Revise and Resubmit • For Editor’s Review • For Re-review by Same or Different Reviewers Reject
Revising and Resubmitting the Manuscript Read the Editor’s Letter Carefully Follow the Editor’s Recommendations • Whether to Submit a Revision • Timeline • Process Recommended • Discretion Provided the Author • Revisions Required and Not Negotiable Revise Manuscript and Resubmit ASAP
Revising and Resubmitting the Manuscript Letter to Editor • NEVER be Defensive • Thank the Reviewers • Indicate where Reviewers’ Comments Improved the Manuscript • Provide a Detailed Enumerated List of Changes Referencing Page Numbers and Editor and Reviewer Comments
Regrouping after Rejection Return to Targeting a Journal Submit Rejected Manuscript Immediately to Different Journal Incorporate Changes Only if YOU Judge the Recommended Changes Are Appropriate
REMEMBER ONLY SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPTS GET PUBLISHED THANK YOU!