Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Rejection notes


I wrote a paper and submitted it to a journal. They rejected it and (kindly) provided their reasons. The thing is, I completely agree with them.


1st Reviewer's Comments
Accessibility
The article is chatty and aimed at a very broad audience. There is no issue with its tone or approach. However, it is only engaging at a level of mild interest. See further for more details.
Usefulness
I'm not sure of the purpose of this article and that, in essence, may be its downfall. The term, "x" has a particular significance and readers are likely to want to know more about how it may be applied, practiced, assessed and reviewed at schools where it is successfully adapted as a programmatic model. This article sets up a series of interviews where the subjects are not aware of the current specific term and so are speaking from their own experience, but clearly not that of practicing the specifics of x according to the x Foundation or other organizations.
Insight
Unfortunately, the author holds back from any analysis so it is hard to see what insights there might be, other than the fact that x connotes a wide range of responses, and few at this school seem to know its contemporary application as a specific model of teaching and learning. Unfortunately, I don't recommend this article for our journal  at this time. The article needs to demonstrate more reflection and intention.

2nd Reviewer's Comments
I did not find this article to be very engaging. The responses to the interview questions are typical, and therefore not very insightful. There are examples from practice, but none that really speak to the broader issue of how to achieve x for all of our students. Each teacher interviewed has some insight into their own practice, but there is no reflection on the data from the author. I think that the teachers' insights could be a valuable resource if looked at more broadly—if the author could look at all of the information to make connections, find overarching themes, and summarize his/her findings.

(Image credit: E.J. Wolfe)

No comments:

Post a Comment