Get Published! Straight Talk from the Editors at Partnership

Get Published! Straight Talk from the Editors at Partnership

Get Published! Straight Talk from the Editors at Partnership OLA Super Conference January 31, 2013 David Fox Mary Kandiuk Ann Smith Outline

About the journal Research and scholarship for librarians Peer review What the IP Editor looks for in a manuscript submission Some noteworthy IP articles Structure of a research article What the TR Editor looks for in a manuscript submission Some noteworthy TR articles Why Publish in Partnership? Questions

About the Journal history Originated at a meeting of The Partnership, Feb 2005 Idea proposed by Cynthia Archer, York University Jennifer Richard appointed as the founding Editor Committee of nineteen volunteers established format and brought journal to fruition First issue published November, 2006 Original Contributors

Sue AdamsHeather Morrison Cynthia Archer Erin Palmer Catherine Baird Della Paradis Tanis Fink Jennifer Richard Lindsay Glynn Pam Ryan Michael Hohner Catherine Steeves Catherine Jeanjean Shad Turner Lorie Kloda Virginia Wilson Heather Matheson Kelli Wooshue Cynthia McKeich Vision

The purpose of this initiative is straightforward: to provide myriad opportunities to the Canadian library community in the realm of scholarly communication. The journal is an outlet for sharing innovations in the workplace and one of a very few Canadian venues for the much desired peer review status. In addition, the journal provides a chance for librarians and library workers to be editors, reviewers and writing coaches. Though of great importance to academic librarians, whose tenure or promotion often depends on peer review, this journal is in no way meant exclusively for academics: this is a journal for everyone. Jennifer Richard. Partnership, Vol. 1, no. 1, 2006 Vision Our philosophy guarantees rigorous peer review and high standards for both theoretical and practical articles which are made freely and immediately available to everyone

In this journal you will also find news, profiles and views from librarians and library workers across Canada, further connecting members of our library community. Jennifer Richard. Partnership, Vol. 1, no. 1, 2006 Background

Publisher: The Partnership Sponsors: Guelph, U of S Library Canadian (but not exclusively) Library and information practice and research A practitioners journal (but not exclusively) Structured 9 sections Multi-type Peer reviewed / Non-peer-reviewed Background

Open Access CC Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Canada license Publishing platform: OJS Indexing - Google/Google Scholar - Library Literature & Information Science Full Text (Wilson) - Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (EBSCO) - Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) - Scholars Portal (OCUL) - JournalTOCS Budget Editorial Team

Editor-in-Chief Section Editors Innovations in Practice Theory and Research Conference Spotlight Professional Development Media/Publication Reviews Profiles Viewpoints French Language Editor Copyeditors Layout Editors Business Manager David Fox

University of Saskatchewan Mary Kandiuk Ann Smith Jennifer Easter Jessica Lange Michael Hohner York University Acadia University University of Guelph-Humber McGill University University of Winnipeg

-Lindsay Gibb Kumiko Vzina Catherine Jeanjean Michael Lines Rainer Schira Mark Weiler Barbara Kelly -The Beguiling Library Services Dept Universit Concordia Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada University of Victoria Brandon University MLIS, Western University Vancouver Public Library

Basic Facts 14 issues published 294 articles 271 unique authors 213 peer-reviewers 763 registered readers 750,972 article reads

Articles Published by Section Section Media/Publication Reviews Profiles News and Announcements Theory and Research* Innovations in Practice* Professional Development Editor's Comments Conference Spotlight* Viewpoints TOTAL * Peer-reviewed

Articles Percentage 57 48 47 45 31 26 15 13 12 294

19.4 16.3 16.0 15.3 10.5 8.8 5.1 4.4 4.1 100.0 Articles by Issue 40 35 30

25 20 15 10 5 0 Non-peerreviewed Peer-reviewed Authors by Sector 20062012 University Public College School

Special & govt Prov/Regional system Association LIS professor Consultant Other PhD MLIS student ??? 56.46 14.02 4.43 4.43 4.06 3.69

3.69 2.58 N=271 2.58 1.85 1.85 0.37 0 10 20

30 Percent 40 50 60 Authors by Province/Territory 20062012 Ontario Alberta British Columbia Saskatchewan

Nova Scotia International Manitoba Quebec Newfoundland & Lab New Brunswick Prince Edward Island Yukon Northwest Territories Nunuvut 35.79 12.55 11.07 10.33

9.96 5.17 5.17 4.06 2.95 1.11 0.74 0.37 N=271 0.37 0.37 0

5 10 15 20 Percent 25 30

35 40 Submissions Online submission Section policies Author guidelines Original work MS Word

MLA style Copyright agreement Editorial Process phase 1 Manuscript uploaded Editor review, select peer-reviewers, request reviews1 week Peer review 4 weeks Evaluate reviews and make editorial decision 1 week (Accept, Revisions required, Resubmit for review, Reject) Authors revisions 4 weeks Editor________ review

1 week Total 11 weeks Editorial Process phase 2

First stage copyedit 1 week Author copyedit 1 week Final copyedit 1 week Initial Proofread .5 week Prepare galley proofs .5 week Author proofread 1 week Corrections .5 week Final proofread .5 week Publish! _______ Total 6 weeks Research and Scholarship for Librarians Scholarship of discovery, so-called "pure and applied research,"

pursues new knowledge Scholarship of integration synthesizes and interprets knowledge to provide perspective Scholarship of application solves problems for a larger community using knowledge from one's particular field of expertise Scholarship of teaching and learning contributes to knowledge about how people learn Lowry, Charles B. Research and Scholarship Defined for portal: Libraries and the Academy. portal: Libraries and the Academy 4.4 (2004): 449-453. Types of Research for Librarians

Conducting bibliometric and citation studies Investigating how faculty and students seek and use information Creating new ways to organize information Developing new methods and strategies for information retrieval Establishing new mechanisms to evaluate library services and processes Researching the impact of the library on knowledge creation Examining effective approaches to providing reference and delivering instructional activities Compiling bibliographies

Also discipline/subject specific research Research Methods in Library/Information Science Bibliometrics (using quantitative analysis and statistics to describe patterns of publication within a given field or body of literature) Survey Methods (sampling of a population using qualitative or quantitative measures) Historical Approach (collecting historical information about a problem or a topic) Qualitative Analysis (examining non-measurable data) Content Analysis (analyzing the actual content and internal features of media) Discourse Analysis (questioning the basic assumptions of quantitative and qualitative research methods) Structural Analysis (analyzing and exploring the structures underlying the text or system, which make the content possible) Examples of Scholarship for Librarians Publishing research in journals, books, and conference proceedings Conference presentations Book reviews

Editorial positions Conference poster sessions Non-refereed articles Grant proposals Peer-reviewing And.authoring blogs, maintaining wikis, etc. *Peer-reviewed journal article appears to be the gold standard for the social sciences, including library and information science Choosing the Appropriate Venue for Publication An Important Decision! Should be given consideration early on in the process as opposed to after the article is written Have several journals in mind. What types of articles do they

publish? Do they publish articles on the same subject? Finding the right journal lessens the chance of rejection after a lengthy peer review process. Review the journals instructions for authors which provide guidelines for manuscripts. Considerations: Is the journal peer reviewed? Articles must be peer reviewed in order to be considered research articles. Other factors: reputation, frequency of publication and length of time for article to appear, availability, open access (DOAJ), indexing. Peer Review The Royal Society is the worlds oldest scientific publisher, with the first edition of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society appearing in 1665. Henry Oldenburg Secretary of the Royal Society and first Editor of the publication ensured that it was licensed by the council

of the society, being first reviewed by some of the members of the same, thus making it the first ever peerreviewed journal. Peer Review Process Author submits manuscript which is sent out for blind peer review (2-3 reviewers) Peer reviewers provide recommendations to accept, accept with revisions, or resubmit Author receives comments via the editor and makes revisions on the basis of the feedback received Editor makes the final decision to accept on the basis of the revised manuscript Process can take several months depending on the journal What is the future of peer review in the age of the internet?

Responsibilities of Different Players in the Peer Review Process Peer reviewer: assesses the quality of the work; has a background in/understanding of the subject in order to be able to evaluate it; recommends revisions to improve the quality of the work Editor: ensures a standard of quality for what is published; selects peer reviewers appropriate to the submission; balances and considers the comments of the reviewers; decides whether the article is accepted, accepted on the basis of revisions, or rejected; provides appropriate feedback on the basis of the reviews to the author; ensures the final manuscript incorporates the comments of the reviewers and meets the standards of the journal Author: considers the comments of the peer reviewers; makes revisions as necessary

Authors usually find that the peer review process improves the article! Being a peer reviewer is good preparation for writing your own article! What the IP Editor Looks for in a Manuscript Timely Innovative Unique Creates a context for the general reader as well as a description and discussion of the project planning and implementation to guide others Conclusions based on findings/evidence that are clearly

evident to others; appropriate interpretation of results Most Common Peer Reviewer Criticisms Insufficient detail re: methodology for the project; instrument samples; outcomes; background/context Gaps in the literature review Unsubstantiated statements: conclusions not based on findings; sweeping generalizations i.e. use of indicates as opposed to suggests, assumes as opposed to anticipated; lack of references/examples to support statements -information presented as fact requires attribution! Poor organization/structure/flow of the article Lack of: definitions; applications; documentation; urls and bibliographical references Poor language/grammar; jointly authored articles should be consistent in tone/writing

Some Noteworthy IP Articles Creating and Hosting Student-Run Research Journals: A Case Study by Adrian K. Ho vol. 6 no. 2 (2011) Abstract: This case study aims to examine an academic librarys roles in facilitating the creation and hosting of open access student-run research journals. In addition to providing an online platform to host the journals, the library acquaints students with scholarly publishing, assists them in securing various resources available on campus, and offers support for content management. There are challenges and opportunities for the library as it undertakes the responsibility of hosting student journals. The article concludes with a discussion of possible topics for future research.

Why? Case study that is situated in the broader context of universitys mission and librarys role in support of that mission Deals with a topic that is current and of interest to others Well written and well organized Thorough literature review, including references throughout the article to support the discussion Provides enough detail to assist other libraries that may wish to embark on a similar undertaking Also provides detail regarding the challenges and possible pitfalls What goes into a research article? Informative Abstract Literature Review

Methodology Scope? Results Limitations? Discussion Conclusions Acknowledgements? References Appendices? A Strong Introduction Sets the Scene 1. What are you studying? 2. Why is it important?

3. What is the context, or background? 1: A really clear statement or questions can help This study addressed four specific questions: 1) What childrens literature is currently being used in Atlantic Canadian school classrooms? 2) Are teachers in the Atlantic provinces familiar with the work of both national and regional childrens authors and illustrators?... Howard, 2012, p. 3. 2. BUT only if we know why Faced with these numbers, the library decided to investigate alternative modes of reference to reach their patrons an active approach was needed. It is clear, then, that mobile technologies offer libraries the

opportunity to provide unprecedented access to their collections. McCabe & MacDonald, 2011, p. 2.;Doi, Mason, & Wiercinski, 2011, p. 3. 3. And have enough BACKGROUND to understand Some of the reasons for this trend. The term roaming reference has never been clearly defined.In essence, it is anything occurring away from the confines of the reference desk. Horwath, 2012, p. 2.; McCabe & MacDonald, 2011, p. 2. Biggest Pitfall of the Literature Review in the T&R Section

Literature Review Opening Paragraph While the number of projects in libraries has been increasing, the topic of PM has not been written about as much as other subjects in the library literature (Burich et al. 19; Feeney and Sult 745; Winston and Hoffman 52 and 55). However, within the literature that does exist, there are three aspects of the topic that are described in detail: 1) the PM methodologies used to manage particular library projects, 2) PM methodologies and/or tools for librarians discussed on a general level (i.e., not related to particular library projects) and 3) PM training and skills needed by librarians. What follows is a discussion of the library literature grouped by these three themes. Horwath, 2012, p. 2. Methodology

A noteworthy methodology section Peterson, S. S. (2012). (7)2, 1-21. Preschool Early Literacy Programs in Ontario Public Libraries The multi-method approach has contributed significantly to the validity and robustness of this data. While these children are too young to be interviewed, their "voices" have been captured through observation. All too often our research just examines adult perspectives. The sampling appears to be appropriate; in any case the author(s) has(have) described the limitations of the sampling. There certainly is enough data. Reporting the numbers gave a nice quantitative overview; sharing excerpts from the qualitative data made the number findings come alive. Anonymous Peer-Reviewer for Partnership.

Some of our best results sections Make effective use of charts and tables But charts and tables that are clear And effective summaries of textual data Sowhat DO these look like? Effective Use of a Bar Chart Fox, 2007, p. 7. Effective Use of a Table Fox, 2007, p. 7. So how might you represent textual data?

Perspectives about Program Goals [Research Question] School readiness was parents'/caregivers' predominant desired outcome for their children's participation in the library program. It was also an important goal for many library staff members. Parents'/caregivers' gave specific examples of the school readiness behaviours they hoped that their children would develop through participation in the library programs, including statements that they hoped the program would teach their children to "learn to sit and listen" and "learn to interact with other kids". Stagg Peterson, 2012, p. 6. The discussion section is where you INTERPRET your results Your opening sentences might reiterate your most important findings.

You might start to compare them to other studies. Perhaps you question how meaningful some of the definitions are. So what goes in the Conclusion? The conclusions are based upon the research described in the body of the manuscript. There is never any new informationever. They are reasonable based upon the findings, and the scope, or the limitations of the research. In a preliminary read this editor asks Is the subject matter topical, of practical use, or of interest to our readers?

Is the scope research, theory, or a substantial review article? If it is a research article is it complete? Is it to a minimum standard of research? If it is a theory or review article is it in sufficient depth? Is it written to minimum standards of written English, grammar & punctuation? Is it MLA style? Is it already published? Is it anonymous? To put it visually Has a trusted colleague read your manuscript?

Post peer-review this editor looks for Thought given to the comments of the reviewers & this editor and appropriate revisions Image Credits Wiese, M. (2008). Pancakes [Online Image]. Retrieved from http://[email protected]/2452029695/ Vidalia_11.(2009). Shopping List [Online Image]. Retrieved from[email protected]/3303919983 Koppdelaney, H. (2010). Time Flies [Online Image]. Retrieved from[email protected]/4291413264/ Jones, A. (2006). Handshake [Online Image]. Retrieved from[email protected]/3575000735/ BetsyJean79. (2007). Doll [Online Image]. Retrieved from[email protected]/971611970/ Doi, C., Mason, J., & Wiercinski, J. (2012). 6(1), 1-31.Mobile Access to Audio and Video Collections in Libraries and Other Cultural Institutions Fox, D. (2007). 2(2), 1-25. The Scholarship of Canadian University Research Librarians. Horwath, J. A. (2012). 7(1), 1-34.How Do We Manage? Project Management in Libraries: An Investigation. Howard, V. (2012). (7)1, 1-18. The Sea Stacks Project: Enhancing the Use of Regional Literature in Atla ntic Canadian Schools .

McCabe, K. M., & MacDonald, J. R. W. (2011). (6)2, 1-15 Reinvigorating Reference through Point of Need Service. Peterson, S. S. (2012). (7)2, 1-21.Preschool Early Literacy Programs in Ontario Public Libraries Why Publish in Partnership? Open access wide, rapid exposure Canadian Rigorous peer-review

Good choice for first time authors Friendly and supportive Questions? David Fox [email protected] Mary Kandiuk [email protected] Ann Smith [email protected]

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Liver Function Test Liver chemistry test Clinical implication

    Liver Function Test Liver chemistry test Clinical implication

    Peak values of transaminase activity occur between the 7th and l2th days; activities then gradually decreaser,e aching normal levelsb ythe 3rd to 5th week if recovery is uneventful Persistenceo f increased A LT for more than 6 months after an...
  • Erikson'S Psychosocial Stages of Development

    Erikson'S Psychosocial Stages of Development

    6-8. Adult Stages: Erikson described three adult stages. Intimacy . Vs Isolation, Generativity. Vs Stagnation . and . Ego . Integrity Vs Despair. The first concerns the adult's need to set aside the independent identity in order to develop an...
  • Biology II Lab Practical Review - Valencia College

    Biology II Lab Practical Review - Valencia College

    Biology II Lab Practical Review Part I Last updated 11-29-07 Review Content This review is intended to reflect the general material as presented in the lab documents and does not take into account specific emphases that individual professors may or...
  • Real Life Literacy & Digital Citizenship

    Real Life Literacy & Digital Citizenship

    Education, Knowledge & Curriculum 23 janvier, 2017 Isabeau Iqbal, PhD EDST 403 Creative Commons, Jofre Ferrer: Rencontrez 1 ou 2 enseignants qui ont connu l'"ancien" programme d'étude et parlez-leur du "nouveau" programme.
  • שקופית 1 - Biu

    שקופית 1 - Biu

    J Burford Fields (b December 26, 1953 Oberlin, Kansas), cited as the inventor of the electronic newsletter when, as editor of the Osborne Hawaii Users' (OHU) Newsletter, 1981-1984, he began uploading the monthly editions to the Source.
  • Pre Exam Revision Plan 1. 2. 3. 4.

    Pre Exam Revision Plan 1. 2. 3. 4.

    Pre Exam Revision Plan ... The way in which we give food to consumers. It could be a hotel, restaurant, buffet, outside catering etc. Think about the service type and tailor you question to this to show your understanding. STAFF...
  • Chapter 7 Body Systems - CCSF

    Chapter 7 Body Systems - CCSF

    The low-speed handpiece is one of the most versatile handpieces in dentistry. * The straight attachment slides onto the low-speed motor and locks into place. What is the straight attachment commonly used for? (Laboratory procedures, trimming removable prostheses such as...
  • Food Security -

    Food Security -

    Household Food Security. Almost one in seven U.S. households — over 17 million — suffer from food insecurity. Source: Coleman-Jensen A, Gregory C, Singh A.