Getting published journey into an editor s mind
Download
1 / 38

Getting Published: Journey into an Editor s Mind - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 89 Views
  • Uploaded on

Getting Published: Journey into an Editor’s Mind. Sally St. George, PhD, RMFT Dan Wulff, PhD, RMFT, RSW University of Calgary Faculty of Social Work Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Our Context. Co-editors of The Qualitative Report for 10 years Reviewers for numerous journals and publishers

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Getting Published: Journey into an Editor s Mind' - lawrence


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Getting published journey into an editor s mind

Getting Published:Journey into an Editor’s Mind

Sally St. George, PhD, RMFT

Dan Wulff, PhD, RMFT, RSW

University of Calgary

Faculty of Social Work

Calgary, Alberta, Canada


Our context
Our Context

  • Co-editors of The Qualitative Report for 10 years

  • Reviewers for numerous journals and publishers

  • Published authors

  • Professors teaching qualitative research, social work, and family therapy from undergraduate to doctoral levels


Description of workshop
Description of Workshop

In this workshop we will reveal specifically what the editors of TQR are looking for in terms of content and writing style when they read manuscripts. In a frank presentation we will also tell you what “bugs” us when we are working on the rewriting process.


Objectives
Objectives

  • To identify the key elements of successful article submissions.

  • To define and illustrate a productive author mindset during the editing process.

  • To clearly articulate specific items or issues that retard the editing process and delay the eventual publication.


Key elements of a successful a rticle s ubmission
Key Elements of a Successful Article Submission




Key Words are carefully

constructed for searchers


Introduction sets the scene and grabs the reader with the purpose, rationale, audience, and answer to the “so what?” question



Author Context reveals the knowledge gaps

the author’s

interest, investment, intention


Explanation of IRB or the knowledge gaps

Ethics Approval


Methods: the knowledge gaps

Everything needs

a rationale,

transparency,

and literature support


What the knowledge gapstype of qualitative inquiry

are you using?


How were your the knowledge gaps

participants recruited?


What constitutes your data? the knowledge gaps

How did you collect it?


Reveal each step of your analysis. the knowledge gaps

Use illustrations.



Organize the presentation the knowledge gaps

of your results

(must flow from analysis)


Constructive author mindset includes
Constructive Author Mindset the knowledge gapsincludes. . .


Attentive to journal details the knowledge gaps

(e.g., writing style, journal mission)


Even if manuscripts are not formal studies, they still must be purposeful, transparent, clear, without excessive jargon, and answer the “so what?” question



Maintain politeness for the manuscript


Remain open to feedback for the manuscript


Maintain patience for the manuscript



Narrative must have a for the manuscript

solid progression of thought



What drives us crazy! for the manuscript


Ignoring directions for the manuscript

(e.g., failing to use

and show Track Changes)


Ignoring or not answering for the manuscript

our comments

within a revision


Correcting only one for the manuscript

occurrence of a repeated error


Acting as if one is for the manuscript

using APA style

when one is not


Failing to proofread for the manuscript



Not appreciating for the manuscript

the editor’s time and help



ad