Publishing articles http://arts.kmutt.ac.th/crs/index.php?p=Research_Training/powerpoints

Who has published in an international journal? How did you choose the journal to publish in?

Choosing the journal Criteria for choosing a journal Indexing (e.g. is the journal in Scopus?) Check for Q1 at www.scimagojr.com Academic level of the journal Style of the journal Interests of the journal Difficulty of getting published (publication rates vary from 2% to 50%) Professionalism and length of time till publication Publisher of journal (e.g. Elsevier, Taylor & Francis, John Benjamins, Cambridge, Sage) Choose journal you cite? Choose journal you like reading?

Some horror stories! The black hole! Waiting for reviewer comments for more than one year Publication without notification Acceptance, then rejection on changing the editor Acceptance, and told to wait 3 years for publication

Choosing journals Types of journals International journals in major databases (e.g. Scopus) published by major publishing houses (e.g. Elsevier, Sage, Springer) with restricted access (e.g. through ScienceDirect) and a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process. International journals in major databases which are open-access (e.g. Language Learning & Technology, CALL-EJ). These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process but do NOT charge for publication. International journals in major databases published by major publishing houses which are open- access and charge for publication. These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process. International journals not in major databases published by little-known publishing houses which are open-access and charge for publication. These do not have rigorous refereeing (e.g. they often promise referees’ reports within 2 or 3 days). They often cover a very wide range of subject areas. National journals in the TCI database. These are refereed but not usually rigorous. Journals/magazines for teachers (e.g. MET, HLT)

Choosing journals Types of journals International journals in major databases (e.g. Scopus) published by major publishing houses (e.g. Elsevier, Sage, Springer) with restricted access (e.g. through ScienceDirect) and a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process. International journals in major databases which are open-access (e.g. Language Learning & Technology, CALL-EJ). These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process but do NOT charge for publication. International journals in major databases published by major publishing houses which are open- access and charge for publication. These have a rigorous and lengthy refereeing process. International journals not in major databases published by little-known publishing houses which are open-access and charge for publication. These do not have rigorous refereeing (e.g. they often promise referees’ reports within 2 or 3 days). They often cover a very wide range of subject areas. National journals in the TCI database. These are refereed but not usually rigorous. Journals/magazines for teachers (e.g. MET, HLT)

Identifying scam journals The publisher is on Beall’s list Beall’s list has disappeared, but San has a copy of the last version of the list Publishing fee (normally in Author guidelines or Submission) Wide range of articles accepted Journal description the same as other journals

The publisher is on Beall’s list

Publishing fee

Wide range of articles accepted

Journal description the same as other journals

Journal description the same as other journals

Example 1

This paper was accepted by 17 different journals

Example 2

Choosing conferences Types of conferences Genuine conferences that publish proceedings. These are usually run by well-known organisations (e.g. TESOL, BAAL) or by educational institutions (e.g. universities) [Note: Some conferences are hosted by, but not run by, universities. It is the organiser, not the host, that is crucial.] Genuine conferences that do not publish proceedings (similar to A). Conferences that are held to make money (tourism conferences), not as academic fora. These are businesses similar to scam journals (and are often associated with Type D journals). Conferences that do not exist! A recent type of spam e-mail is invitations to conferences (often in fields that are of no relevance to the recipient). The goal is to get you to pay the registration fee, but there is actually no conference, only a website. Often these refer to conferences in China, but a few years ago a teacher at SWU paid for and travelled to a ‘conference’ in Italy that didn’t exist! Use the SoLA conference list at arts.kmutt.ac.th/crs/index.php?p=/Research_Regulations/journal_conference_lists

Choosing conferences Types of conferences Genuine conferences that publish proceedings. These are usually run by well-known organisations (e.g. TESOL, BAAL) or by educational institutions (e.g. universities) [Note: Some conferences are hosted by, but not run by, universities. It is the organiser, not the host, that is crucial.] Genuine conferences that do not publish proceedings (similar to A). Conferences that are held to make money (tourism conferences), not as academic fora. These are businesses similar to scam journals (and are often associated with Type D journals). Conferences that do not exist! A recent type of spam e-mail is invitations to conferences (often in fields that are of no relevance to the recipient). The goal is to get you to pay the registration fee, but there is actually no conference, only a website. Often these refer to conferences in China, but a few years ago a teacher at SWU paid for and travelled to a ‘conference’ in Italy that didn’t exist!

Genuine quality conferences Organised by major academic organisation or university Specific area of interest Well-published plenary speakers

Tourism conferences Very broad areas of interest Emphasis on social events or tourism Conference description the same as other conferences Publications in scam journals

Very broad areas of interest Emphasis on social events or tourism We invite proposals in all academic disciplines: Humanities and Social sciences, Education, Science and Technology, Business and Economics

Conference description the same as other conferences

Conference description the same as other conferences

Identifying scam conferences www.waset.org/conference/2015/01/london/ICFLTAL The organiser is ‘World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology’ “ICFLTAL 2015 has teamed up with the Special Journal Issue on Advances in Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics”, but the journal doesn’t exist (check on Google) Clicking on ‘Conference proceedings’ leads to a page of WASET journals (all Type D), none of which is related to applied linguistics.

Publications in scam journals

Identifying scam conferences www.waset.org/conference/2015/01/london/ICFLTAL The organiser is ‘World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology’ “ICFLTAL 2015 has teamed up with the Special Journal Issue on Advances in Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics”, but the journal doesn’t exist (check on Google) Clicking on ‘Conference proceedings’ leads to a page of WASET journals (all Type D), none of which is related to applied linguistics. Clicking on ‘Conference committee’ gives a long list of people from Malaysia, Iran, Libya etc. None are from the UK where the conference is to be held.

Fake conferences Advertised by spam e-mail Offer scholarships to cover travel costs Lots of different fees (e.g. charge for visa) Non-existent hotel (check from Google Streetview):

Fake invitations Invitation to run an academic workshop Request to pay visa costs Request for a refundable downpayment guaranteeing attendance Notification of receipt of an award Request to pay registration fee to be eligible for the award

Publishing in a quality journal Preparing the article Choose the journal before writing Check the guidelines for contributors Read 2 or 3 articles in the journal Note: If rejected by one journal and you decide to submit to another, you need to rewrite the article

How to write articles Pay special attention to the points which are common problems

Common problems with research articles Article does not match the journal Different interest Different academic level Article tries to prove something Be open-minded Failure is more interesting than success Data chosen to fit predetermined finding Especially a problem with some research methodologies Double/triple subjectivity in research No theoretical framework to research Unprincipled research methodology Stated framework not implemented Key unstated assumptions Unstated assumptions invalidate findings Unstated assumptions show lack of awareness of issues Problems of identifying own assumptions Confusing organisation General rule: follow standard research article genre template (introduction - literature review - research purpose - methodology - findings - implications/discussion - conclusion) No clearly stated research questions Problems with literature review Missing key literature Vague undefined terms Literature review as a list, not an argument Problems with research methodology No justifications for methodological decisions Mismatch between data collection/analysis procedures and research purpose Problems with findings Inappropriate statistics Unfounded qualitative data presentation

Common problems with research articles Problems with implications/discussion Repetition of literature review Lack of implications Mismatch with findings Wild claims on little evidence Lack of relevance to journal (e.g. no implications for the classroom) Language problems Some errors OK (most applied linguistics journal editors are sympathetic to non-native speakers) BUT may lead to unconscious bias in reviewers Opaque or super-formal language Differences between international and Thai articles Level of coherence of literature review Level of informativeness of literature review Level of reflection in literature review Level of strength of literature review as research foundation Level of strength of research justification Level of strength of discussion Level of reflection of discussion

How to write articles Pay special attention to the points which are common problems Always ask someone to read and comment on your article before sending it off And ask them to be as mean and critical as possible!

Anonymising your article Under the double-blind refereeing system, referees should not be able to identify authors Change all self-citations to e.g. Author (2015) Only include Author (2015) in bibliography with no details Avoid including other information that may allow identification (e.g. use ‘a Thai university’, not the specific university)

Annoying details in preparing articles Formatting references Following reference systems (e.g. need to include full first names of authors?) Including DOIs: www.crossref.org/guestquery/ Strange requirements Elsevier journals require research highlights “Highlights are three to five result-oriented points that provide readers with an at-a- glance overview of the main findings of your article. Think of them as a quick snippet of the results—short and sweet. Each Highlight must be 85 characters or fewer, including spaces, and the Highlights together must clearly convey only the results of the study.” The opacity of words in context can be measured. Opaque words are usually high-frequency polysemous words with unusual meanings. An opaque word list can help teachers choose which words to teach.

SEND TO ONE JOURNAL ONLY Sending the article SEND TO ONE JOURNAL ONLY

Online submission Stages in Elsevier online process Register as an author Type title of article Enter name of authors Enter abstract Enter keywords Select article classification (sub-discipline) Attach files (Title page, Highlights, Article manuscript, Biodata) Attach separate table and figure files if needed

The cover letter For those journals which still accept submissions through e-mail, you need a cover message: Attached is an article for your consideration for publication in Text and Talk. I declare that it is original work and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere. It is slightly over the normal word limit, please let me know if this is a problem.

Journal communications Acknowledgement of receipt of article EITHER rejection by editor OR notification of sending to reviewers with expected time Types of reviewer recommendation Acceptance with minor changes (unlikely) Acceptance with major changes Revise and resubmit Rejection (hopefully with reasons) If rejected, need to decide: give up OR submit elsewhere

Reviewers’ comments Typical format of comments Overview of paper including recommendation General major content points needing revision Specific language/format points needing revision

Sample reviewer comments The literature section is surprisingly short. While this in itself is not necessarily a problem, some areas which appear to be relevant (e.g. teacher beliefs, teacher interactive decision making) are not covered. References which may be worth following up in these areas include Richards, J. C. (1998) Beyond Training, CUP; Johnson, K. E. (1992) Instructional actions and decisions of pre-service ESL teachers. TESOL Quarterly 26/3; Woods (1996) could also be cited in far more depth. Adding issues such as these would frame the research to give it stronger theoretical foundations and wider implications.

Sample reviewer comments It is unclear what the research question is. A hypothesis is mentioned twice but is not clearly linked with the data (since no data concerning the difficulty of avoiding problems is collected). A clearly stated research question is needed.

Sample reviewer comments The procedures are unclear at several points. It is especially unclear how the experimental group operated. Were wikis used in the classroom or outside (thus extending learning time)? Was the planning stage conducted face-to-face? What is the difference between the revising and editing stages? It is unclear how collaboration was implemented in both groups or whether the only real difference was the tool used. In addition, the screenshots are not helpful in illustrating the procedures.

Sample reviewer comments In the first paragraph of the Results, the keyword lists are interpreted as showing “significant lexico-grammatical variation”, yet a keyword analysis will always show differences as this is the purpose of the analysis. The existence of keywords is an artifact of the method and not worthy of interpretation. Whether the keywords illustrate different aspects of texts for the two corpora is the important issue, and this is left till the discussion.

Sample reviewer comments The findings and discussion take an overly simplistic view of the relationship between the producers and the audience. Nearly all of the arguments are made on the assumption that there is a one-way influence from producers to the audience in how ELT is perceived. Yet, adverts are designed to meet customer needs – a point made in the second to last paragraph – and thus audience expectations also influence what information producers include in adverts. The article has a general feel that the general public is a tabula rasa waiting for information from adverts to generate beliefs, whereas the reality is that producers and audience engage interactively in the production of beliefs about ELT.

Dealing with reviewers’ comments Check comments against the article Addend comments to the article Make sure you understand the reasons for the comments Edit following the comments Justify points where revisions are not made Keep track of all revisions made for each comment Produce the revised article Produce a list of revisions made

Dealing with proofs Journal sends (or provides link to) article proofs Includes a short list of queries Sign and submit copyright transfer if necessary