Peer-review

This e-learning/ self-directional learning Module includes four Units, namely Unit 1: Introduction to Scholarly Communication; Unit 2: Communicating with Peer Review Journals; Unit 3: Electronic Journals and Databases; Unit 4: Serials Crisis. This Module was produced under the UNESCO-CEMCA Project Development of Curriculum and Self-Directed Learning Tools for Open Access, 2013-2015.

Publication produced in conjunction with international conference event organised by Sean Lowry and Simone Douglas, November 13 -14, The Lang Center, School of Art, Media, and Technology at Parsons The New School for Design, a division of The New School, New York NY, USA. Published by Project Anywhere, Parsons The New School for Design and mThe University of Newcastle, November 2014, ISBN 978-0-692-32297-0.

This is an open source public document produced in connection with a UK urban regeneration CPO public inquiry. It should be read in association with other public inquiry documents including my proofs and those of Loretta Lees. In evidence, Professor Lees drew the Inspector’s attention to her current Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded research project. Attention was also drawn to the ESRC website which was said to contain a copy of the relevant research bid document. In fact, the website contains only a summary (appendix 1) of the full bid document that was submitted in evidence on 31 January 2018. The website identifies Professor Lees as the Principal Investigator. At the outset, I would note that the general subject of Professor Lees’ ESRC research outlined in the bid is welcome and necessary. The wish to evaluate the impacts of estate regeneration policy is commendable. That said, this response statement is intended to help the Inspector and the Secretary of State (SoS) understand the relevance of the research bid in the light of this CPO Public Inquiry and the evidence of Professor Lees. This statement provides a response to the research brief as it was called in evidence, for the ESRC project above. The brief is, in effect, the research bid that secured the funding for the project. This response is in two parts: 1) a response to the full research bid and 2) a response to the Abstract that is published on the ESRC website. This website Abstract contains the reference to Mr Boris Johnson’s “Kosovo-style social cleansing” that was referred to in oral evidence by Professor Lees.

Carta a las/os lectoras/es Antípoda. Revista de Antropología y Arqueología, "Tema libre", N.o 46 (enero-marzo 2022).

https://revistas.uniandes.edu.co/toc/antipoda/46

https://revistas.uniandes.edu.co/pb-assets/antipoda/editorials/Editorial_Ant%C3%ADpoda46-1647547425137.pdf

https://revistas.uniandes.edu.co/multimedia/antipoda

This article reports results of a survey of authors of submissions to Quarterly over a five-year period. The goal was to take stock of who the journal’s contributors are and to get a sense of their evaluation of the peer review process. In addition to describing authors who submit their work (faculty rank, academic degrees, years in teaching, etc.),
we chose to examine their views on peer review because of concerns in the literature—in journalism and mass communication (J/MC) and the academy in general—with the process.

International Journal of Business and Management wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Their help and contributions in maintaining the quality of the journal are greatly appreciated. International Journal of Business and Management is recruiting reviewers for the journal. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer, we welcome you to join us. Please find the application form and details at http://www.ccsenet.org/reviewer and e-mail the completed application form to ijbm@ccsenet.org.

This Unit, Communicating with Peer Review Journals, covers two important academic publishing channels, namely peer reviewed journals, conferences and their proceedings. This Unit also highlights different methods and procedures of peer reviewing for publishing primary literature emanated from research studies. The peer reviewing is essential for validating quality of research findings conveyed by researchers, which are subject to fulfilment of ethical standards and appropriate research design, sampling and other methodological issues. This Unit discusses in details aspects such as Academic Journals, Their Functions, Working and Procedures; The Peer Review Process; World of Journal Publishing; The Importance of Scientific and Professional Societies in Journal Publishing; and Publishing in Conferences. Published in Open Access for Researchers > Module 1: Scholarly Communications > Unit 2: Communicating with Peer Review Journals.

PA is rooted in some of the most popular theories which describe and explain how learning and, in particular, L2/FL language learning can be effectively combined with assessment (Peng & Jui-Ching Fion, 2009; Topping, 1998). There are six theoretical stances that support the use of PA activities in the writing classroom from both cognitive and psycholinguistic perspectives (De Lisi & Golbeck, 1999; Divaharan & Atputhasamy, 2002; Kohonen, 2009; Thurston, Van de Keere, Topping, Kosack, Gatt, Marchal, Mestdagh, Schmeinck, Sidor, & Donnert, 2007; Xiao, 2010): a) process writing theory, b) collaborative learning theory, c) social cognitive theories, d) metacognition, (f) interaction and second language acquisition (SLA), e) cognitive constructivist theory, and f) self-regulation. Research based on these theoretical stances has provided substantial evidence that PA activities help L2/FL learners develop not only their L2/FL writing abilities but also their overall L2/FL language abilities through the negotiation of meaning that typically takes place during peer response (Liu & Hansen, 2002; Topping, 2009).

Peer review is the process of evaluating the work or activity of a person with competence in the field which is categorized by type of activity and by occupation or theme. In medical education filed, it helps educators in critically reflecting on their teaching to further develop it and improve the experience of the learner as well as one’s own professional development. A review of the literature demonstrates that there are three basic models of peer review of teaching usually conducted within higher education institutions.

Susan Haack, “Out of Step: Academic Ethics in a Preposterous Environment.”

Abstract: Doing our work as professors responsibly and well requires good character; more specifically, it requires such virtues as industry, persistence, judgment, honesty, focus, a realistic sense of what is feasible, impartiality, independence, consideration, and courage—all of which are needed in teaching, in research, and in such other activities as editing, presenting papers, refereeing, participating in hiring decisions, etc. Sadly, recent changes in the academic environment—the growth of a new class of professional academic administrators, the ever-increasing insistence on publication for career advancement, growing emphasis on grants and research projects, and focus on “rankings”—are systematically eroding these key academic virtues.

Key words: academic virtues, industry, persistence, judgment, honesty, focus, realism, impartiality, independence, consideration, courage, university administration, decline of academic culture.

Recent studies of peer review underscore that some facets of accepted evaluation methods have serious flaws. Assessments are often burdened by protectionist inclinations against new ideas, unstable editorial demographics, affiliational biases, and occasionally unethical and/or corrupt protocols, or the avoidance of protocols put in place to restrain biases. This article examines a solution to these dilemmas: the open-source peer review. This emerging evaluation system allows the readers of a journal to offer feedback on submissions before they are officially sanctioned by a publication. Thus, the concept allows journal-readers (who are conceivably experts, like the editors) to decide or make recommendations on which articles are appropriate to continue with further revisions and/or to publish. The concept promises to offer a more democratically and demographically stable evaluation system, one that has the potential to avoid some of the problems that are inherent to traditional scholarly reviews.

The writer conducted this research because the students of the non-English department, FITK UIN Semarang could not write text well. They still wrote text with random way, and they did not understand the social function, the generic structure and the language feature of the text. Using peer review in writing class, the writer intended to improve students' writing especially recount, descriptive, procedure, and cause and effect texts. The had two problems: 1). How is the implementation of 'peer review' writing for the FITK students of 2014/2015?; 2). How is the writing improvement of FITK students of 2014/2015 after applying 'peer review' writing? There are some texts introduced to the FITK students. The students are expected to be able to write text. Through classroom action research implementing peer review, the students' writing ability had been improved well.

Graduate peer review groups were one of the first steps in renewing graduate student communication support and resources on campus. These disciplinary groups meet weekly for presentation & review of work. Come learn how the groups evolved & how they’ve helped students re-envision their work without exchanging papers.

Catatan Penilaian Artikel Oleh Reviewer 1 :
1. Kelengkapan dan kesesuaian unsur : lengkap
2. Ruang lingkup dan  kedalaman :  Dalam
3. Kecukupan dan kemutakhiran data serta metodologi :Cukup data terbaru
4. Kelengkapan unsur kualitas penerbit : Lengkap
5. Indikasi Plagiasi : Tidak ada
6. Kesesuaian Bidang Ilmu : Sesui

Alur bagan diberikan keteragan

The popularity of scholarly open access (OA) Journals is rapidly growing in amongst authors and readers. This has resulted in challenges for scholars having to identify and avoid low-quality and flaky publishers.
In this flood of new publishers with varying quality, Peertechz swears to show the path for legitimate journals. Peertechz puts forward various sets of criteria intended to allow scholars to assess the quality of the journals.

Process-oriented writing instruction has been advocated for both L1 and L2 writing classrooms since the 1960s. Empowering learner autonomy may best occur through non-direct instruction (Rogers & Freiberg, 1994), engaging students in social learning (Vygotsky, 1978) and creating workshop-like classrooms (Murray, 2004). Any number of techniques can be used, preferably in-sync with each other, to accomplish such an approach. This study will examine the results of some recent action research in the classroom to attempt to ascertain among various process-techniques, designed to accomplish the aforementioned aspects of process-oriented instruction, which techniques (CODA paradigm / rubrics, journals, peer reviews, teacher conferences, etc.) were most useful to developmental students, especially from their own points of view. Student voices were collected through oral presentations, instructor evaluations, and classroom observations in an American classroom where native English speaking and nonnative English speaking writers wrestled with freshman level developmental writing side-by-side.

Resumen El proyecto, enmarcado en una investigación doctoral, propone el análisis de las formas en que investigadores, dedicados a la producción de conocimiento en Física, asumen la actividad de escritura de textos de divulgación. Consideramos perspectivas actuales de Psicología Cognitiva, que sostienen que las actividades de producción y comprensión realizadas por las personas están mediadas por sus concepciones de carácter relativamente implícito acerca de cuestiones relacionadas, en este caso, la transmisión y adquisición de conocimiento científico a partir de textos de divulgación científica. Las líneas de investigación que aportan modelos y metodologías para abordar esta problemática son: las investigaciones en teorías implícitas sobre el aprendizaje y las investigaciones sobre la composición y la comprensión de los textos, como herramienta para la adquisición de conocimiento. Los objetivos de esta investigación son: Identificar las concepciones de los autores según los siguientes dominios de aplicación de las teorías implícitas: a) el aprendizaje de la ciencia y b) la adquisición de conocimiento a partir de textos de divulgación científica. Analizar las relaciones entre los dos dominios de las concepciones, las relaciones entre el grado de experiencia en composición de textos de divulgación, docencia e investigación y los dos dominios considerados en las concepciones. Analizar las relaciones entre las concepciones de los autores y las características de los textos de divulgación que elabora y las relaciones entre grado de experiencia en composición de textos de divulgación científica y las características de los textos. La investigación se lleva a cabo en dos fases: La primera, consta de un cuestionario enviado por correo electrónico. Esta fase ya ha sido llevada a cabo y se están analizando los resultados, a partir de los cuales se seleccionan los sujetos para la siguiente fase.En la fase 2, una vez seleccionados aquellos investigadores que realizan divulgación y clasificados según la teoría de aprendizaje, se realiza una entrevista semiestructurada y se solicita la evaluación de textos de divulgación propios y ajenos. Se presentan los resultados preliminares obtenidos en la fase 1.

This special issue of Urban Planning seeks to contribute to and extend the debate regarding the application of Lefebvre’s ideas to the current challenges and opportunities of urban planning. Papers can cover a range of issues e.g.: governance, urban design, urban regeneration, environmental management, community participation, housing, policy making and evaluation, local/strategic planning, infrastructure, international planning, neoliberal urbanism, smart cities, land hunger, urbanisation, gentrification, urban poverty/inequality, the right to the city, new towns/cities, planning history, city management and the law.
We welcome papers that present: new empirical research, critical reviews of current issues, theoretical discussions and developments and demonstrate a critical engagement with Lefebvre’s ideas and arguments.

I prepared this when I was founding Semantics-Syntax Interface (an international journal) four years ago. I went through many different referee guidelines then and selected the points below. We were sending this file together with the review form and the anonymous manuscript to the referees.
I believe that reviewers should be trained, so that they can be nice consultants to editors and helpful commentators to authors. Needless to say, referees play an important role in science; they purify science from pseudoscience.

International Business Research wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Their help and contributions in maintaining the quality of the journal are greatly appreciated. International Business Research is recruiting reviewers for the journal. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer, we welcome you to join us. Please find the application form and details at http://recruitment.ccsenet.org and e-mail the completed application form to ibr@ccsenet.org.

Coastal area of East Java Sea has long been threatened by industrial source pollution, mangrove conversion into shrimp culture, over fishing, destructive fishing, sedimentation, and coastal settlement. Heavy-metal is probably the most threat that directly influencing human health. This study was carried out in two coastal areas considered central to the threat, Kedawang and GunungAnyar. Lead concentration was measured in the water, sediments, and white-mangrove, Avicenniaalba. It showed that heavy-metal has been accumulated in the sediments. Root of mangrove tree can up take and bio-concentrating this lead heavy metal up to 5.74 mg kg-1 dry weight. The concentration in the leaves and seeds were significantly lower as it frequently exuviate, drop down, and regenerated. This metal concentration was higher than the allowable concentration (Ministerial Decree of State Environment No. 51 year 2004). Measures have to be taken in order to maintain coastal area healthy for human population.
Get the full articles at: http://www.innspub.net/volume-6-number-5-may-2015-jbes/

As Editor-in-Chief at The Freelance Netizen™ online magazine, I edit, peer-review and supervise peer review services for all article and editorial submissions.

The Freelance Netizen™ explores the interdisciplinary connections between Information & Communication Technologies and the history of information culture, civil rights and social action. It critically addresses digital mediums as the intercultural confluence of global dialectics. A typical editorial at TFN magazine might explore the present and future directions of Intercultural Information Ethics and its crossroads with the latest WikiLeaks debate.

TFN magazine provides a crossroads between the academic applications of philosophy, technology and interculture with current events, looking to philosophies of communication and information as a platform for addressing questions of digital ontology. TFN magazine is currently exploring, alongside the International Centre for Information Ethics, applications of global citizenship in a digital era with a specific address of digital citizenship and the netizen.

The objective of TFN magazine is to further expertise in intercultural editing and writing for academic and scholarly communications and current events, both on a local and global scale, by researching and structuring innovative dialogue towards a citizen engagement of Information & Communication Technologies (ICTs) through an understanding of the nature of information.

Jared Bielby,
Editor-in-Chief, TFN
Co-chair, ICIE
Editor, IRIE
www.jaredbielby.com

http://www.thefreelancenetizen.com

Este texto analisa o papel das revistas no processo de avaliação do sistema brasileiro de pós-graduação de acordo com as regras do Qualis e do SciELO. Sustenta que as revistas são titulares do “direito-função” de selecionar artigos por meio da dupla avaliação cega por pares, direito este que deve ser exercido em prol da comunidade acadêmica. Por esta razão, o texto mostra que as revistas são um mecanismo de autorregulação da avaliação da pós-graduação brasileira. Em sua parte final, o artigo discute a relação entre este modelo de avaliação e a tradição jurídica brasileira, em especial, nossa maneira de praticar e refletir sobre a dogmática jurídica no Brasil.

Attitudes towards open peer review, open data and use of preprints influence scientists' engagement with those practices. Yet there is a lack of validated questionnaires that measure these attitudes. The goal of our study was to construct and validate such a questionnaire and use it to assess attitudes of Croatian scientists. We first developed a 21-item questionnaire called Attitudes towards Open data sharing, preprinting, and peer-review (ATOPP), which had a reliable four-factor structure, and measured attitudes towards open data, preprint servers, open peer-review and open peer-review in small scientific communities. We then used the ATOPP to explore attitudes of Croatian scientists (n = 541) towards these topics, and to assess the association of their attitudes with their open science practices and demographic information. Overall, Croatian scientists' attitudes towards these topics were generally neutral, with a median (Md) score of 3.3 out of max 5 on the scale score. We also found no gender (P = 0.995) or field differences (P = 0.523) in their attitudes. However, attitudes of scientist who previously engaged in open peer-review or preprinting were higher than of scientists that did not (Md 3.5 vs. 3.3, P<0.001, and Md 3.6 vs 3.3, P<0.001, respectively). Further research is needed to determine optimal ways of increasing scientists' attitudes and their open science practices.

As its starting point, this article investigates claims published in Qualitative Inquiry by Ceglowski, Bacigalupa, and Peck (2011) that Early Childhood Research Quarterly censored qualitative research. Unfortunately they assert rather than demonstrate political bias against qualitative research, fail to show that its publication in Early Childhood Research Quarterly has actually declined and ignore alternate hypotheses compatible with their data. After breaking their argument into parts, I find their censorship claims completely unsupported by evidence. However, this article has two larger aims. The first is to show how mistaking hypotheses for evidence, arguing unconvincingly from quantitative data, and failing to consider alternative interpretations of evidence weaken qualitative research, lowering its credibility within social science. The second is to consider the wider academic ramifications of publishing a peer-reviewed journal article that totally fails to support its claims. Based on these concerns, the article offers some practical advice to avoid the negative outcomes demonstrated by the publication of Ceglowski, Bacigalupa, and Peck and considers the scientific implications of this rebuttal to their claims having been rejected previously by Qualitative Inquiry.

Este artículo busca reunir en un sólo documento al conjunto de ejes problemáticos que rodean la definición e implementación de mecanismos y criterios referidos a la evaluación de la ciencia académica. Se revisitan y ordenan los consensos sobre sus defectos y las propuestas esgrimidas para contrarrestarlos a partir de una revisión bibliográfica que gira en torno a tres interrogantes: quiénes participan de la evaluación; cómo se lleva a cabo la evaluación y qué es lo que se evalúa. Por último, se exponen brevemente algunas notas referidas a la literatura específica generada desde América Latina, destacándose el reducido espacio que ocupa esta temática hasta el momento.

This article seeks to bring together in a single document the set of issues surrounding the definition and implementation of mechanisms and criteria relating to the evaluation of scientific research. It revisits and orders the basic agreements regarding their defects and the proposals for countering them based on a bibliographical review revolving around three questions: who participates in the assessment; how the assessment is carried out; and what is to be evaluated. Finally, it briefly presents some notes referring to the specific literature generated from Latin America, highlighting the limited space dedicated to this topic until now.

As part of my Research Awareness and Support Skills unit, this task involved choosing a peer-reviewed article and completing a critical evaluation. Through the review, I start with an introduction to why I personally chose this article, and then continue onto the critique. I started with examining the general aspects of the article, such as the title, abstract, language and structure before moving onto the literature review. In evaluating the Literature review I considered many important characteristics that are essential to produce a coherent and well flowing introduction. The method of this article I found particularly interesting and included an in depth discussion on the purpose, methods, procedure and participants. Although ethical considerations was not mentioned within this article, I have outline briefly this gap and relevance. The results were considered in areas such as the analysis and how these were presented to the reader. Then finally the discussions and further research were broached and considered whether they were in depth and relevant. Overall I concluded this task with considering the main strengths and limitations of the article.