View in EDS

Toward Greater Transparency and Inclusion in Manuscript Review Processes: A Relational Model

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Toward Greater Transparency and Inclusion in Manuscript Review Processes: A Relational Model
Language: English
Authors: Alison Cook-Sather (ORCID 0000-0002-0116-7158), Ruth L. Healey (ORCID 0000-0001-6872-4900)
Source: Teaching & Learning Inquiry. 2024 12.
Availability: University of Calgary. Libraries & Cultural Resources, 410 University Court NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada. Tel: 403-220-7175; e-mail: TLI@ucalgary.ca; Web site: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/TLI/index
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 23
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Descriptors: Peer Evaluation, Academic Language, Writing (Composition), Interrater Reliability, Evaluation Methods, Feedback (Response), Equal Education, Inclusion, Professionalism, Pragmatics, Policy, Learning Strategies, Teacher Effectiveness
ISSN: 2167-4779
2167-4787
Abstract: Peer review is widely accepted as critical to legitimating scholarly publication, and yet, it runs the risk of reproducing inequities in publishing processes and products. Acknowledging at once the historical need to legitimize SoTL publications, the current danger of reproducing exclusive practices, and the aspirational goal to "practice what we preach" as SoTL practitioners regarding effective feedback to students, we argue for rethinking "rigor," developing more inclusive practices, and engaging in greater transparency in relation to peer review. To situate our discussion, we revisit foundational work in the development of SoTL and then offer an analytical framework informed by recent scholarship on redefining rigor and the emotional experience of receiving feedback. Using this framework, we propose a relational model of peer review and present two examples of efforts in which we have been involved as founding co-editors of the "International Journal for Students as Partners" to move toward greater transparency and inclusion in manuscript review processes.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1440698
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1440698
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1440698
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Toward Greater Transparency and Inclusion in Manuscript Review Processes: A Relational Model
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alison+Cook-Sather%22">Alison Cook-Sather</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0116-7158">0000-0002-0116-7158</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ruth+L%2E+Healey%22">Ruth L. Healey</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6872-4900">0000-0001-6872-4900</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Teaching+%26+Learning+Inquiry%22"><i>Teaching & Learning Inquiry</i></searchLink>. 2024 12.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: University of Calgary. Libraries & Cultural Resources, 410 University Court NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada. Tel: 403-220-7175; e-mail: TLI@ucalgary.ca; Web site: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/TLI/index
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 23
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Evaluation%22">Peer Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Language%22">Academic Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Writing+%28Composition%29%22">Writing (Composition)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interrater+Reliability%22">Interrater Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Feedback+%28Response%29%22">Feedback (Response)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Equal+Education%22">Equal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professionalism%22">Professionalism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pragmatics%22">Pragmatics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Policy%22">Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learning+Strategies%22">Learning Strategies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Effectiveness%22">Teacher Effectiveness</searchLink>
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 2167-4779<br />2167-4787
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Peer review is widely accepted as critical to legitimating scholarly publication, and yet, it runs the risk of reproducing inequities in publishing processes and products. Acknowledging at once the historical need to legitimize SoTL publications, the current danger of reproducing exclusive practices, and the aspirational goal to "practice what we preach" as SoTL practitioners regarding effective feedback to students, we argue for rethinking "rigor," developing more inclusive practices, and engaging in greater transparency in relation to peer review. To situate our discussion, we revisit foundational work in the development of SoTL and then offer an analytical framework informed by recent scholarship on redefining rigor and the emotional experience of receiving feedback. Using this framework, we propose a relational model of peer review and present two examples of efforts in which we have been involved as founding co-editors of the "International Journal for Students as Partners" to move toward greater transparency and inclusion in manuscript review processes.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1440698
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1440698
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 23
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Peer Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Writing (Composition)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interrater Reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Feedback (Response)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Equal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inclusion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professionalism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pragmatics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Policy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Learning Strategies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Effectiveness
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Toward Greater Transparency and Inclusion in Manuscript Review Processes: A Relational Model
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alison Cook-Sather
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ruth L. Healey
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 2167-4779
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2167-4787
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 12
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Teaching & Learning Inquiry
              Type: main
ResultId 1