The Rosabeth Moss Kanter Award Module 2, Class 2 A Teaching Module Developed by the Curriculum Task Force of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cathy Jordan, PhD Associate Professor of Pediatrics Director, Children, Youth and Family Consortium University of Minnesota Member, Community Campus Partnerships.
Advertisements

Critical Reading Strategies: Overview of Research Process
Understanding the Basics of Peer Review: Part 1 – Receiving a Manuscript IMPULSE Journal for Undergraduate Neuroscience This is a the first of a two part.
Doug Elliott Professor, Critical Care Nursing The final step: Presentation and publication Research Workshop: Conducting research in a clinical setting.
Publishers of original thinking. What kinds of academic writing are there? There are many kinds of writing that originates from academia. In my view there.
From Manuscript to Publication in a Scientific Journal Inside Rekommendations from an Editor Haifa – Beer Sheva – Jerusalem Sven Hessle November /05/2015.
GETTING PUBLISHED Chapter 18.
Professor Ian Richards University of South Australia.
Improving Learning, Persistence, and Transparency by Writing for the NASPA Journal Dr. Cary Anderson, Editor, NASPA Journal Kiersten Feeney, Editorial.
The Rosabeth Moss Kanter Award Module 2, Class 2 A Teaching Module Developed by the Curriculum Task Force of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network.
Responsible Conduct of Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activities Peer Review Responsible Conduct of Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activities.
About Journals What is a “journal”?
On manuscript preparation and journal submission: Case of MTL and JRME Shuk-kwan S. Leung National Sun Yat-sen University June 20th,
H E L S I N G I N K A U P P A K O R K E A K O U L U H E L S I N K I S C H O O L O F E C O N O M I C S Orientaatiopäivät 1 Writing Scientific.
Reading the Literature
SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE WRITING Professor Charles O. Uwadia At the Conference.
RESEARCH STUDENTS AS AUTHORS (©29:5:15) Professor Peter Gilroy
Research Methods School of Economic Information Engineering Dr. Xu Yun Office : Phone : :
Writing & Getting Published Uwe Grimm (based on slides by Claudia Eckert) MCT, The Open University.
How to Write a Critical Review of Research Articles
 Remember, it is important that you should not believe everything you read.  Moreover, you should be able to reject or accept information based on the.
Morten Blomhøj and Paola Valero Our agenda: 1.The journal NOMAD’s mission, review policy and process 2.Two reviews of a paper 3.Frequent comments in reviews.
How to write a professional paper. 1. Developing a concept of the paper 2. Preparing an outline 3. Writing the first draft 4. Topping and tailing 5. Publishing.
Intro to Critiquing Research Your tutorial task is for you to critique several articles so that you develop skills for your Assignment.
THE REVIEW PROCESS –HOW TO EFFECTIVELY REVISE A PAPER David Smallbone Professor of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, SBRC, Kingston University Associate.
FOR 500 The Publication Process Karl Williard & John Groninger.
Giving Your Vitae a JOLT Michelle Pilati Professor of Psychology Rio Hondo College Edward H. Perry Professor of Mechanical Engineering University of Memphis.
Technical Writing: An Editor’s Perspective Michael K. Lindell Hazard Reduction & Recovery Center Texas A&M University.
The Process of Conducting Research. What is a theory? a set of general principles that explains the how and why of phenomena. Theories are not directly.
ACADEMIC PUBLISHING How a manuscript becomes an article.
Dr Karen Smith Educational Development Unit. We will (briefly) cover:  the mechanics of getting published in journals  how to choose the right journal.
Publishing Research Papers in Applied Linguistics and TESOL Jinyan Huang, Ph.D., Professor Niagara University, United States Wuhan University of Technology.
CPD 3 - Advanced Publishing Skills 1 - How to Get Published and to Continue to Get Published in Leading Academic Journals Professor Tarani Chandola with.
Research Methods in Business and Economics3 Jan Brzozowski, PhD.
Copyright © Springer Publishing Company, LLC. All Rights Reserved. BECOMING A SCHOLAR IN NURSING EDUCATION – Chapter 16 –
Scientific Literature and Communication Unit 3- Investigative Biology b) Scientific literature and communication.
Getting published Sue Symons Editorial Manager Karen Mattick
CAPE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Dr.V.Jaiganesh Professor
CMNS 110: Term paper research
Journeys into journals: publishing for the new professional
Welcome! SSCI-E 100a Lecture 1.
The Work Place Report 16 June 2017
Publishing Academic Work
Planning your Dissertation
Parts of an Academic Paper
Role of peer review in journal evaluation
Literature Review Ms. Maysoon Dorra.
RES 722 Enthusiastic Studysnaptutorial.com
How to publish from your MEd or PhD research
Merrilyn Goos University of Limerick, Ireland
CSC 682: Advanced Computer Security
Lesson 5. Lesson 5 Extraneous variables Extraneous variable (EV) is a general term for any variable, other than the IV, that might affect the results.
Dealing with reviewer comments
Information Literacy Peer Reviewed Sources
Dealing with reviewer comments
Style You need to demonstrate knowledge and understanding beyond undergraduate level and should also reach a level of scope and depth beyond that taught.
Writing a Research proposal
What the Editors want to see!
What is the Work-Family Area of Study
CAPE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Advice on getting published
5. Presenting a scientific work
Managerial Decision Making and Evaluating Research
The Work Place Report June 2018
5. Presenting a scientific work
Haifa – Beer Sheva – Jerusalem Sven Hessle November 2012
Scholarly Writing: Term Papers to Publication
Dr John Corbett USP-CAPES International Fellow
Presentation transcript:

The Rosabeth Moss Kanter Award Module 2, Class 2 A Teaching Module Developed by the Curriculum Task Force of the Sloan Work and Family Research Network

How Does Information Get into the Knowledge Base? New information published in: Working papers Reports Books Scholarly Journals Each has advantages and disadvantages associated with them.

Peer Review Process & Knowledge Building Description: Manuscripts submitted for publication are reviewed and critiqued by scholars with expertise in both content area and/or methods used by authors. Purpose: To ensure that articles published in academic journals reflect “minimum standards” of quality

Peer Review Process 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. Author becomes familiar with explicit and implicit expectations for articles published. 2. Author drafts manuscript and submits it to journal editor. 3. Editor sends manuscript to 2-3 scholars (typically). 4. Usually, editor sends guidelines for review to reviewers. 5. Reviewers comment on characteristics of article including: content, structure, clarity, and extent to which article makes a contribution to the body of literature. Reviewers recommend: that editors accept manuscript (as is or with minor corrections), that editors reject the manuscript, or that the author make substantial revisions to manuscript in line with the recommendations made by reviewers. 6. If the author is asked to revise and re-submit, author may need to re-write sections of manuscript and/or conduct additional analyses. 7. Hopefully, manuscript is published.

Why Do Awards Contribute to the Building of the Knowledge Base? Awards for excellence can: Reinforce (and make explicit) standards of excellence for a specific discipline or field Engage the interest of scholars who review the publications and then nominate some for the award Provide a mechanism to focus the attention of scholars in the discipline/field to articles that might not have been noticed by them

Standards of Excellence for Assessing the Quality of an Article Connection to theoretical perspective(s) Connection to previous empirical studies Rigor of research design (including sampling) Operationalization of key concepts Selection of appropriate measures Use of appropriate analytic techniques Generalizability of findings Contribution to knowledge base Important implications for future research, policy-making, practice Clarity and relevance of information contained in each section of the article Article well-written Not restricted to a particular method

Purpose of the Kanter Award “This award raises awareness of high quality work-family research among the scholar, consultant and practitioner communities. It fosters debate about what the standards of quality for work-family research should be, and ultimately will raise those standards. And it identifies the ‘best of the best’ on which to base future research.”

Procedure for the Kanter Award Structure of the Review Committee Journals Reviewed Qualifying Articles Three round peer review process (nominees, first round, second round) The criteria used by the reviewers is posted on the web pages of the Kanter Award: http://www.cfs.purdue.edu/CFF/pages/kanter/award_procedures.html.

Typical Structure of Research Articles Abstract Introduction Review of State of Knowledge Research Questions Methods (sample, measures, analytic techniques) Findings Discussion Conclusion (limitations, implications) References