Search

The article focuses on the 2017 Navigating Research Report "How Academic Users Understand, Discover and Utilize Reference Resources" of the Oxford University Press related to student engagement with easily available and library-acquired reference materials. Topics discussed include 75 percent of free library-acquired reference materials used by students, students from English-speaking regions use free available study materials and student behavior.

The successful publication of peer reviewed academic journal articles is an essential achievement for early career researchers (ECRs) seeking to establish themselves in their profession. However, this journey can pose several significant challenges for ECRs. We use an autoethnographic approach that draws deeply on our lived experience as ECRs to capture our recent and current experiences of negotiating the academic journal article publication journey to explore the tensions, contradictions, and benefits encountered in the journey. We critically examine challenges we experienced in choosing a target journal and negotiating the follow‐up process; undertaking revisions; and our experiences of limitations and possibilities in peer review and editorial support. While the peer review journal writing process has played a significant role in supporting us to become more effective ECRs, we also highlight challenges we faced negotiating ethical quandaries in this space, as well as illustrate how our preconceptions of a simple publication journey were confounded by subsequent experience of the complex realities of the space. We also suggest that educational interventions are indicated to provide ECRs support in foundational knowledge about what constitutes valuable revisions, an effective paper, and the scope of issues that can be addressed to make a paper more effective, with reference to the possibility of academic mentoring to support this need. Finally, we explore our findings in light of the tensions imposed by the relative inexperience and lack of power yielded by ECRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses how post-publication peer review (PPPR) can help address limitations of peer review and augment pre-publication peer reviews. Topics discussed include barriers faced by PPPR before it becomes a norm for scientific research such as lack of PPPR comments in most research, need for PPPR to be recognized by hiring and promotion committees as academic scholarship and a need for academic recognition of PPPR to move outside letter model still rooted in the era of printing press.

One of the difficulties in scholarly publishing in English scientific journals is the complex process of revision, which often involves reconstruction of the content and the language of the manuscript and becomes particularly difficult when it comes to non‐native writers of English. Focusing mainly on the role of English and language editing in revision, the present study investigated this process in terms of the Iranian scholars’ perceptions, problems, and strategies. To this end, 15 Iranian scholars from different disciplines were selected and interviewed, and different themes were derived and analysed. According to the premise of Academic Literacies and the idea that we acquire the skills and practices of our professions mainly by participating in them, our results introduced revision as a set of social practices located within a specific academic structure reflecting particular beliefs and values. Our results also showed that the very specific situation in Iran caused the participants to be, at a great extent, overwhelmed by the process, often leading them to adopt strategies that might not be conducive to their academic advancement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]