380 likes | 497 Views
Getting Published: Journey into an Editor’s Mind. Sally St. George, PhD, RMFT Dan Wulff, PhD, RMFT, RSW University of Calgary Faculty of Social Work Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Our Context. Co-editors of The Qualitative Report for 10 years Reviewers for numerous journals and publishers
E N D
Getting Published:Journey into an Editor’s Mind Sally St. George, PhD, RMFT Dan Wulff, PhD, RMFT, RSW University of Calgary Faculty of Social Work Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Our Context • Co-editors of The Qualitative Report for 10 years • Reviewers for numerous journals and publishers • Published authors • Professors teaching qualitative research, social work, and family therapy from undergraduate to doctoral levels
Description of Workshop In this workshop we will reveal specifically what the editors of TQR are looking for in terms of content and writing style when they read manuscripts. In a frank presentation we will also tell you what “bugs” us when we are working on the rewriting process.
Objectives • To identify the key elements of successful article submissions. • To define and illustrate a productive author mindset during the editing process. • To clearly articulate specific items or issues that retard the editing process and delay the eventual publication.
Key Words are carefully constructed for searchers
Introduction sets the scene and grabs the reader with the purpose, rationale, audience, and answer to the “so what?” question
Literature Review shows what knowledge base is available and the knowledge gaps
Author Context reveals the author’s interest, investment, intention
Explanation of IRB or Ethics Approval
Methods: Everything needs a rationale, transparency, and literature support
What type of qualitative inquiry are you using?
How were your participants recruited?
What constitutes your data? How did you collect it?
Reveal each step of your analysis. Use illustrations.
Organize the presentation of your results (must flow from analysis)
Attentive to journal details (e.g., writing style, journal mission)
Even if manuscripts are not formal studies, they still must be purposeful, transparent, clear, without excessive jargon, and answer the “so what?” question
Letter with submission should summarize the author’s hopes for the manuscript
Narrative must have a solid progression of thought
Ignoring directions (e.g., failing to use and show Track Changes)
Ignoring or not answering our comments within a revision
Correcting only one occurrence of a repeated error
Acting as if one is using APA style when one is not
Not appreciating the editor’s time and help