Building upon previously published articles from 18 different disciplines, this research delves into the area of how academics inform one another, addressing the issue of how academic scholars can determine the optimum journal for submission of their research. A comprehensive model of the journal selection process is developed, including 39 detailed considerations spread over three major categories: likelihood of timely acceptance; potential impact of the manuscript (journal credibility, prestige, visibility); and philosophical and ethical issues. Specific guidelines are given for evaluating such concepts as manuscript-journal "fit," journal prestige, and journal visibility. The graphical model developed here assists authors in comparing journal alternatives and provides new researchers with insights into how the three primary journal selection categories are weighed and balanced. In addition, less commonly understood concepts, such as Time to Publication, Review Cycle Time Delay, and Publication Time Delay, are identified and named, and their relationships are defined in this article. On a broader level, this research demonstrates that scholars across disciplines have substantial common interests with respect to journal publishing, that the ties that unite academics seeking to publish are strong, and that the potential for future crossdisciplinary research in the area of how academics inform one another is correspondingly robust.
Building upon previously published articles from 18 different disciplines, this research delves into the area of how academics inform one another, addressing the issue of how academic scholars can determine the optimum journal for submission of their research. A comprehensive model of the journal selection process is developed, including 39 detailed considerations spread over three major categories: likelihood of timely acceptance; potential impact of the manuscript (journal credibility, prestige, visibility); and philosophical and ethical issues. Specific guidelines are given for evaluating such concepts as manuscript-journal "fit," journal prestige, and journal visibility. The graphical model developed here assists authors in comparing journal alternatives and provides new researchers with insights into how the three primary journal selection categories are weighed and balanced. In addition, less commonly understood concepts, such as Time to Publication, Review Cycle Time Delay, and Publication Time Delay, are identified and named, and their relationships are defined in this article. On a broader level, this research demonstrates that scholars across disciplines have substantial common interests with respect to journal publishing, that the ties that unite academics seeking to publish are strong, and that the potential for future crossdisciplinary research in the area of how academics inform one another is correspondingly robust.
Executive SummaryWith demonstrated benefits to higher level learning, peer review in the classroom has been well researched and popular since at least the 1990s. However, little or no prior studies exist into the peer review process for online courses. Further, we found no prior research specifically addressing the operational aspects of online peer review. This research addresses that gap by comparing the issues involved in managing peer review for an online course with those for a traditional classroom course. In an exploratory case study, two sections of the same introductory level course were taught by the same professor in the same academic term, one section in the traditional classroom and one as an online section. Both sections covered the same material in the same order. Online students had access to narrated PowerPoint recordings that tracked in-class lectures. The same assignments and exams were used. The two sections used a joint discussion board for posting questions and answers about the course material. In short, the two courses were almost identical, except for the steps necessary to make peer review operate in an online environment.An eleven-step process for implementing peer review was isolated and documented as part of this research. All steps except the first, creating the grading rubric, required more time and effort for an online class than for a traditional class. Four steps were substantially more complex in an online environment: assigning students to do specific peer reviews; handling late reviews; hiding reviewer identity before making reviews available to reviewees; and distributing completed peer reviews back to reviewees. Overall, results suggest that, without specialized supporting software, electronic reviews for an online class are far more complex to orchestrate than similar reviews administered using paper in a traditional classroom. Minor procedural steps that easily are made both unambiguous and obligatory in a paper-based classroom peer review became far more difficult to implement online. In addition, since specific peer review software is seldom available, the need to use a variety of software products, each of which was originally designed for other purposes, added substantially to the intricacy of implementing online peer review.This research provides specific suggestions for faculty considering using peer reviews in online courses, particularly in online Information Technology courses or other courses where writing is not the primary activity being reviewed. In addition, the online peer review features and functionality detailed here provide a basic requirements definition for a potential peer review software package flexible enough to be used across disciplines and with both traditional and online classes.Material published as part of this publication, either on-line or in print, is copyrighted by the Informing Science Institute. Permission to make digital or paper copy of part or all of these works for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that the ...
Treatment in outpatient departments of university clinics is far beyond research and teaching activities required by law. However, the ability of outpatient departments of universities to provide excellent outpatient services should have a more dominant role in the health care system. Therefore access to care should be deregulated for the patients and reimbursement schemes should be adjusted to adjust for the present losses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.