From Pipedreams
to Pipelines
Scholarly Publishing and
the Art of Having Fun
Topics for Conversation
 Why publish?
 What to publish?
 Where to publish?
 How to publish?
 Technical aspects
 Psychological aspects
Why Me?
 Editorships
 Review of Educational Research
 Journal of Experimental Education
 Florida Journal of Educational Research
 External reviewer
 Educational Researcher
 American Educational Research Journal
 Psychological Methods
 Educational and Psychological Measurement
 Published in a variety of journals for 20+ years
Five Not-So-Easy Pieces
 Have something worth saying
 Say it well
 Find the right place to say it
 Persevere
 Enjoy
Why Publish?
 Mandated
 Professional responsibilities
 Educational preparation
 Choice
 Prestige
 Perks
 Pleasure
What’s Worth Saying?
 Problem/Questions
 Trivial vs. Substantive
 New twists and insights
 Know the literature
 Research of the finest kind
 Every compromise a weak link
 Why waste your time on junk?
 How much more effort?
 Good problems + good methods = success
What’s Out There?







Empirical studies
Reviews & syntheses of others’ work
Descriptions of “my stuff”
Advocacy
Criticism & re-interpretation
Book reviews
Theoretical papers
Things Well Said
 Read, read, read
 Write early, write often
 Know your audience
 Good writing is good teaching
 The intelligent but naïve reader
 Target a journal and follow a model
 Seek advice from the published
 Mentors, co-authors and friendly critics
 The promise and the peril of the “next draft”
 The good-enough principle
Things Well Said (Cont’d)
 Series of steps
 First draft
 Internal proof and revise
 Second draft
 Friendly critics
 Proof and revise
 Third draft
 Conference presentation
 (Hopefully) friendly critics
 Proof and revise
 Fourth draft
 Editors
Anatomy of a Scholarly Paper
Theory, policy, major trends
Review previous
empirical work
(detail & critique)
First: Accuracy
and clarity
My Study
Purpose
Method
Results
Discussion & implications
For theory, policy, future work
Second: Style
and interest
Choosing an Outlet
 Know the field




Major journals
Major authors (where do they publish?)
Sources you’ve cited
The web is not enough
 Target the best journal with the best fit
 Appropriate content first
 Academic reputation second
 Model your paper
 Follow recently published examples
 Instructions for authors
What Makes a ‘Good’ Journal?
 Readership and circulation
 Practitioners
 Researchers/scholars
 General public
 Impact factors
 Total citations by others
 Long-term citations by others
 Selectivity
 Acceptance rates/rejection rates
 Not a very meaningful criterion, but some folks
are impressed with these statistics
Editorial Process: The Editor
 Submission to editor/editors
 Pre-submission query?
 Cover letter
 Paper/electronic: follow the rules!
 Be patient but not too patient
 Reject/Revise/Send out for review
 Appropriate content
 Appropriate quality
Editorial Process: The Reviewers
 Anonymity of author(s) and
reviewer(s)
 Reviewer expertise?
 Decision letter from editor




Accept without revision (extremely rare!)
Accept with minor revision (rare!)
Revise and resubmit (common)
Reject (common)
 Be patient but not too patient!
Editorial Process: Resubmission
 Which revisions to make?
 Mandatory revisions
 Suggestions
 Explicitly address all criticisms
 Same reviewers or different reviewers
 Cover letter to editor/editors
 Detail changes (page numbers)
 Defend your work
 Be gracious
Editorial Process: Rejection
 Consider reviews carefully
 Fatal flaw in your work?
 Misunderstanding by reviewers?
 Poor fit with journal?
 Does ‘no’ really mean ‘no’?
 Major revision and submit as new
manuscript?
 Don’t criticize the critics
 Conversation with editor
Editorial Process: Acceptance!
 Congratulate yourself and your coauthors
 Keep copy of acceptance letter or email
 Immediate publication credit
 Manuscripts get lost (changes in editorships)
 Page proofs
 Check for typos
 No major changes – only corrections
 Quick turn-around
 Purchase reprints?
The Psychology of Scholarship
 Habits
 Publishing is an important part of our
profession (teaching, research, service)
 Finite time and energy to see a
manuscript through the publication
process (be selective)
 Reading, writing, keeping up with the
field
 Feeding your soul
 Colleagues and co-authors
The Psychology of Scholarship
 Willing to take risks
 “Rejection” is a harsh word, but a helpful one
 An error in conversation is limited in time and
breadth
 An error in publication lasts forever and can be
seen by anyone
 Every rejection holds a lesson for us
 Thick skin
 Critics are your friends
 Don’t take things personally
 John Tukey and Jacob Cohen: publication
challenges in their careers
Professional Perseverance
 Patience and the lengthy pipeline
 Avoid the temptation to double dip
 Same reviewer pool for multiple journals
 “Least publishable unit”
 Multiple papers from single project
 Self-plagiarism
 Multiple, staggered projects
 Pleasures of “Revise and Resubmit”
 Pleasures of “Reject”
 Tough skins and the love of flowers
 Plethora of potential publishers
The Art of Having Fun
 Joining a grand conversation
 Leaving your mark on the world
 Building a reputation
 Building professional relationships
 Learning and growing
 Shoulders of giants