How to get published in Asian EFL Journal JALT Niigata June 23 rd, 2013 John Adamson UNP

Overview Asian EFL Journal (est. 2002): partial OA The Linguistics Journal (est. 2005): OA Asian ESP Journal (est. 2005): OA English as an International Language Journal (est. 2007):OA International Journal of Law, Language & Discourse (est. 2011):OA TESOL Journal (est. 2007): OA Philippine EFL Journal (est. 2008): OA Arab EFL Journal (est. 2010): OA

Asian EFL Journal Research Articles Teaching Articles Book ReviewsTheses/ dissertations Word limits None/best approx. 10,000 None/best approx. 6-7, wordsNone Characteristics Applied linguistics with EFL relevance to a wider Asian readership. Extensive lit in the field. Papers which have a triangulated/mixed methods approach. Findings and discussion link back to lit. Classroom practice papers with less theory but explorations and reflection. Realia or VDO uploads OK. Unsolicited reviewers select their own materials to review. Solicited reviewers are contacted and asked to review materials from a list of available materials. Full MA, M.Phil or Doctorate papers accepted if relevant to readership.

Asian EFL Journal Online intake: Review process and timelines: RAs & Book Reviews published in Quarterly editions TAs monthly Theses/dissertations monthly Acceptance rate: screening in 6-7 screened in out of p.m. (500 plus p.a.) published articles = approx. 15% of those screened in.

Conference proceedings & Special editions Special editions CLIL in Asian contexts (forthcoming Dec 2013) Teacher education Academic writing Language, culture and identity in Asia Conference proceedings TBL ELF/EIL ESP

Asian EFL Journal: types of submissions RAs: Applied Linguistics/ESL-EFL with ‘Asian’ focus/applicability, Global EFL issues TAs: Issues surrounding the classroom impacting on practice: Teacher Education, SLA, identity, sociolinguistic issues TAs currently needed!

Editorial Process Submit to an online address Senior Associate Editor (x3) ‘screens’ in or out – rejections with some suggestions if some potential exists. Associate Editor (x12)supervises by sending out to two reviewers (x91). Corresponds with author till accept/reject. Chief Editor (Roger Nunn) sends out official accept/reject message with publication date. Submission sent to Production (proofreaders).

Evaluation criteria: RAs On a scale of Excellent – Acceptable – Unsatisfactory Complete, clear and well organized presentation Significance of the problem General applicability and interest to the field (relevance beyond case presented) Relevance and applicability to practical teaching/curriculum decisions/test design, etc. Description of the problem within a theoretical framework (where appropriate) Literature review is complete and demonstrates a clear relationship to the problem Appropriateness of research design and method Accurate and useful presentation of results Sound discussion, interpretation, argument and analysis Conclusion describes implications for education theory, research and/or practice Suggestions for improvement Annotated feedback

Evaluation criteria: Alternative Voice (alt voc) Submissions which don’t follow normal academic writing genre (not identified as such but included as normal RAs or TAs) Use of author’s (first-person) voice (with appropriate code-switching) Coherent organization (Do not overly consider standard generic structure) Adequate explanation of the (teaching issue), context/environment, participants Reference to relevant literature as needed (but not necessarily in a standard literature review) Relevance and resonance beyond the context, case presented Persuasive and coherent support for the views expressed. (argumentation, methodology, examples, data, perhaps drawing upon the author’s own experience) Interpretation of any outcomes from a teaching perspective Critical self-reflection To what extent would this submission benefit from interaction/mentoring with the author(s) which goes beyond the standard review – amendment – re-review cycle?

Evaluation criteria TAs On a scale of Excellent – Acceptable – Unsatisfactory complete, clear and well organized presentation statement of the teaching issue, context, participants applicability and interest to the teaching field (relevance beyond case presented) background/literature review links theory and practice or provides a clear rationale of practice relevance and appropriateness of (research design and method), the topic discussed or the materials design/teaching approach proposed powerful and coherent supporting argumentation of the opinion expressed (or accurate analysis/description) and/or useful interpretation of (results/) outcomes from a teaching perspective critical self-reflection on teaching practice (e.g. what was learned, what action taken) recommendations for teaching practice and further investigation appropriateness of formatting and referencing Suggestions for improvement Annotated feedback

Tips for publication 1.Research Ethics: informed consent 2.Follow submission guidelines (APA etc) 3.Submissions statement: no simultaneous submissions 4.Link your paper with a previous article 5.Be ready to redirect (upon advice) to another journal in the group 6.Remove mark-up function 7.Remove signs of it being a university paper 8.Think of the wider Asian readership: applicability 9.If a case study, do you generalize beyond the case? 10.Have you found a gap in the literature? 11.Methodologically: replication studies OK.

If finally published Formal acceptance letter Online but hardcopy versions through Lulu No fees for submissions. TAs open access but a subscription for readers at $5 for 6 months. Opportunity to join as a reviewer.

Thank you Submissions welcome! For RAs and TAs For BRs