CMPUT 603 - Teaching and Research Methods1 CMPUT603 - Fall 2005 Topic2: Refereeing (After Alan J. Smith, “The Task of the Referee”, IEEE Computer, April,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Critical Reading Strategies: Overview of Research Process
Advertisements

CSE594 Fall 2009 Jennifer Wong Oct. 14, 2009
Cleveland State University ESC 720 Writing in Electrical and Computer Engineering Peer Review Dan Simon 1.
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.
Insider's guide to getting published Getting your paper to review stage Insights from an editor Steven Dellaportas A/Prof in Accounting Co-editor: MAJ.
Getting journal articles published February 2013 Waterford Institute of Technology Professor Sally Brown Emerita Professor, Leeds Metropolitan.
GETTING PUBLISHED Chapter 18.
Reviewing the work of others Referee reports. Components of a referee report Summary of the paper Overall evaluation Comments about content Comments about.
Experiences from Editing a Journal: Case EJOR Jyrki Wallenius Helsinki School of Economics EJOR Editor Outgoing Editor till June 30, 2005 EJOR.
Informative Speaking  Types of Informative Speeches About Objects About Processes About Events About Concepts.
ALEC 604: Writing for Professional Publication Week 6: Literature Review.
ALEC 604: Writing for Professional Publication Week 10: Faculty/Peer Reviews.
The peer review process and the task of a referee
Reference and Fact Checking: Too Much or Not Enough? Shawn Kennedy, Editor, American Journal of Nursing Patricia D’Antonio, Editor, Nursing History Review.
SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE WRITING Professor Charles O. Uwadia At the Conference.
SIS Philosopher’s Cafe Mary Anne Kennan and Kim M Thompson 30 July 2014 Tips and Insights on Publishing and the Publication Process.
Research Methods for Computer Science CSCI 6620 Spring 2014 Dr. Pettey CSCI 6620 Spring 2014 Dr. Pettey.
Dr. Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam Department of Library and Information Studies, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan Branch
In the name of God How To Get A Paper Accepted In TRANSACTIONS? Dr. Bimal K. Bose, Life Fellow, IEEE Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
Refereeing “And diff’ring judgements serve but to declare, That truth lies somewhere, if we knew but where.” – William Cowper, Hope.
Literature Survey, Literature Comprehension, & Literature Review.
Writing a research paper in science/physics education The first episode! Apisit Tongchai.
Research Methods and Techniques Lecture 1 Introduction & Paper Review 1 © 2004, J S Sventek, University of Glasgow.
Ginny Smith Managing Editor: Planning and Urban Studies Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Publishing in journals Nick Sangster Faculty of Veterinary Science.
1 How to review a paper by Fabio Crestani. 2 Disclaimer 4 There is no fixed mechanism for refereeing 4 There are simple rules that help transforming a.
Software Engineering Experimentation Rules for Reviewing Papers Jeff Offutt See my editorials 17(3) and 17(4) in STVR
 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.
Research Methods and Techniques Lecture 8 Technical Writing 1 © 2004, J S Sventek, University of Glasgow.
Ian White Publisher, Journals (Education) Routledge/Taylor & Francis
Literature Search – How to Make Hard Work Easier? Prof. Haiying Huang Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering University.
MedEdPORTAL Reviewer Tutorial Contact MedEdPORTAL
Reviewing the Research of Others RIMC Research Capacity Enhancement Workshops Series : “Achieving Research Impact”
Literature Survey, Literature Comprehension, & Literature Review.
Reviewing Papers© Dr. Ayman Abdel-Hamid, CS5014, Fall CS5014 Research Methods in CS Dr. Ayman Abdel-Hamid Computer Science Department Virginia Tech.
ICHPER  SD Journal of Research Writers’ Workshop Steven C. Wright, Ed.D. Kinesiology Pedagogy Coordinator University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH
REVIEWING MANUSCRIPTS TIPS FOR REVIEWING MANUSCRIPTS IN PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS Bruce Lubotsky Levin, DrPH, MPH Associate Professor & Head Dept. of Community.
FOR 500 The Publication Process Karl Williard & John Groninger.
The Research Process.  There are 8 stages to the research process.  Each stage is important, but some hold more significance than others.
Ian F. C. Smith Writing a Conference Paper. 2 Disclaimer This is mostly opinion. Suggestions are incomplete. There are other strategies.
Manuscript Review Prepared by Noni MacDonald MD FRCPc Editor-in-Chief Paediatrics and Child Health Former Editor-in -Chief CMAJ
Ian F. C. Smith Writing a Journal Paper. 2 Disclaimer / Preamble This is mostly opinion. Suggestions are incomplete. There are other strategies. A good.
The Task of the Referee Arnon Rungsawang Massive Information & Knowledge Engineering COmputer and Network SYstem Laboratory Department.
How to get a paper published Derek Eamus Department of Environmental Sciences.
CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH PAPER WORKSHOP: FROM AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY TO A LITERATURE REVIEW.
Sept 17, 2007C.Watters 1 Reviewing Published Articles.
Reviewing an Academic Paper John A Clark Professor of Critical Systems Royal Society Research Merit Award Holder.
How to get your research published.
LITERATURE REVIEWS Conducted to ensure a researcher is familiar with ‘all’ of the what is known about a particular field.
Publishing research in a peer review journal: Strategies for success
Dr.V.Jaiganesh Professor
Literature Review Dr. Mozaherul Hoque Abul Hasanat.
PLANNING AND DESIGNING A RESEARCH STUDY
How to Prepare an Annotated Bibliography
How to Write Extended Abstracts
Literature review Lit. review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Mostly it is part of a thesis.
Robotics Conferences and Journals
Locating & Evaluating Sources
Critical Evaluation of Information Sources
Introductory Reviewer Development
Evaluating Information
The Process of Getting Published: Reviews and Rejection
Software Engineering Experimentation
Conducting a STEM Literature Review
Researching Physics Web-based Research.
Advice on getting published
Strategi Memperbaiki dan Menyiapkan Naskah (Manuscript) Hasil Review
Dr John Corbett USP-CAPES International Fellow
Presentation transcript:

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods1 CMPUT603 - Fall 2005 Topic2: Refereeing (After Alan J. Smith, “The Task of the Referee”, IEEE Computer, April, 1989, pp ) José Nelson Amaral et al.

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods2 Role of the Referee zWhat is the role of the referee? yFor an acceptance recommendation: xIs the referee responsible for the correctness of the paper? yFor a rejection: xWhat should be the goal of the report? yDoes the quality of the report affect the referee reputation? How?

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods3 Referee Report Structure zSummarize your recommendation zSummarize the point of the paper zEvaluate the significance of the research zEvaluate the quality of the research yMethodology, techniques, accuracy, presentation zOverall recommendation yOn a rejection, clearly state the reasons yMake the strength of your opinion clear yOn acceptance, list required and suggested changes.

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods4 Evaluation of a Research Paper zWhat is the purpose of the paper? zIs the paper appropriate? zIs the goal significant? zIs the method of approach valid? zIs the execution of the research correct? zAre the conclusions supported by the data? zIs the presentation satisfactory? zWhat did you learn?

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods5 Evaluation of a Research Paper (categories) zMajor results zGood, solid, interesting work zMinor, but positive, contribution to knowledge zElegant and technically correct but useless zNeither elegant nor useful, but not wrong zWrong and misleading zSo badly written that technical evaluation is impossible

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods6 Comparative Evaluation zWhat are the standards of this journal or conference? yIf you recommend a revision (minor or major), will you see the paper again? yIf you do, what should you check for?

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods7 Evaluating a Tutorial zAre the title and abstract adequate? zIs the scope too wide, too narrow, too bizarre? zDoes the paper have a consistent theme? zIs the material correct? zIs the coverage too simple or too sophisticated? zIs the paper well-written and clear?

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods8 Evaluating a Survey zIs the author an expert in the field? zIs the material integrated in a consistent manner? (Annotated bibliographies are not interesting) zIs the coverage balanced and thorough? zIs all the important literature cited? zIs the presentation biased, slanted, selective?

CMPUT Teaching and Research Methods9 Other Important Issues zSimultaneous submissions, prior publication, and unrevised retries zAcknowledgments and plagiarism zTimely response and returning a paper zThe author’s reputation zConfidentiality zConflicts of interest zThe editor’s role zThe program chair’s role