One of the things that I was told when I first walked through the doors in the College of Communication and Information at the University of Tennessee as a first year doctoral student was the following: 1) Make sure to take every assignment in your class and either integrate it into your dissertation, or try to submit it to a conference for presentation; 2) Research and teaching skills and experience is essential – academic institutions are looking for candidates who have had experience in both of these areas of academia; and 3) publish, publish… and publish! This is definitely something that enhances your reputation as a growing scholar and researcher, as well as an expert in this particular area of study.
However, there are certain things that I have noticed along the way during the past couple of years as a PhD student when it comes to publication. First, is the peer-review process really unbiased, and what is really the difference between published work, and unpublished work? An interesting series of articles that appeared in The Scientist have raised these various issues in academic circles and in different disciplines. There are some research studies that I have looked at in my own field and others that have been absolutely excellent and are cutting edge – while there are others that you have to ask yourself, how did this piece get published? Either the results and research design are flawed, or there are even some mistakes in the theoretical framework of the paper. Then, there is of course the situation where peer reviews of research studies are supposed to be “unbiased,” and instead – you see a small group of gatekeepers in one discipline trying to control and evolve into academic gatekeepers to keep their studies published in the academic journals, and make sure that others are not published.
On a personal note – I recently heard that one of the my friends was asked to peer review a journal article for a respected journal in one of the social science disciplines. However, my friend (who I highly respect and consider to be a very good student) just recently graduated with their bachelor’s degree. Wait…. what is up with this picture? Even as a doctoral student, we are asked to review papers at conferences, but ONLY with other PhD students, not faculty. My concern would be to ask the journals if they believe that undergraduate students have the knowledge, expertise, experience, and skills necessary to analyze complex statistics, understand theoretical frameworks, or have an in-depth knowledge of all of the previous literature in the discipline? I would say that for the most part, I would say no. When you think of who is reviewing your articles and potential publication pieces, I would imagine that it would be someone that was someone either 1) had an established and long-term academic and research career; and 2) was considered to be an expert in studying the phenomenon in the discipline. This is a huge worry for future academic professionals – how do we really know if our research is being reviewed correctly?
The question that I have is the following: If you can’t get published because you are facing roadblocks in one journal outlet – where do you go next? There are several things that I would recommend that you do. First, if it doesn’t work the first time – try, and try again. Persistence is the key in this situation – you just have to keep working on it and it will all work out in the end. Second, be aware of the influence and politics in the discipline you are in – if you know this ahead of time, you will be more prepared. And lastly – there are other ways to distinguish yourself as a leading scholar, emerging researcher, and innovative professional in your field in a proactive manner. By having your own website and blog, you are able to practice on your writing skills by writing on these various topics. By practicing each day, your writing will become more sophisticated and concise, which is helpful in writing research papers. Also, be transparent and willing to share your knowledge with the online community. Don’t be a gatekeeper – you want to help evolve the research and field for better, not hold it back. The more emerging ideas and research we can do together – the better off academia and the profession will be.
In order to move the social sciences into the 21st century, we need to work together to produce sound, innovative, and creative research that will benefit both the academic discipline theoretically and can be strategically applied back to the profession.
Hope you all are having a wonderful day!
Best Wishes,
Karen
0 Comments