1

Publishing in Higher Education: (some) Practical Advice

Stuart Palmer

2

Writing for publication – why?

it’s fun – or is that just me? it’s an essential part of a scholarly approach it forces you to reflect on your thinking it’s an avenue for dissemination of your work it creates a track record for grant applications it earns research income for Deakin it’s an avenue for collaboration etc.

3

Writing for publication – where?

a journal a book a book chapter a conference paper a performance an exhibition a letter to the editor a book review etc.

4

‘Counting’ publicationsCategory Internal Weight ‘DEST’ Score

A. AUTHORED BOOKS A1 Books - Authored – research 7.0 5.0A2 Authored – other 2.0A3 Revision/ new edition 0.2A4 Major research monograph 1.0A5 Minor research monograph 0.2A6 Research report / technical paper 0.1A7 Edited Book 0.5AN Other book, or book not attributed to 0.5B. BOOK CHAPTERSB1 Book chapter 1.0 1.0*B2 Book chapter in non-commercially published book 0.5BN Other book chapter, or book chapter not attributed to 0‡

C. JOURNAL ARTICLES

C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal 1.0 1.0C2 Other contribution to refereed journal 0.3C3 Non-refereed articles in a professional journal 0.1C4 Letter or note 0.1CN Other journal article 0‡

D. REVIEWSD1 Major Review 1.0D2 Reference Materials 0.1E. CONFERENCE PUBLICATIONSE1 Full written paper – refereed 1.0 1.0E2 Full written paper - non-refereed / Abstract reviewed 0.2E3 Extract of paper 0.1E4 Edited Volume of Conference Proceedings 0‡

F. AUDIO-VISUAL RECORDINGS 0.5G. COMPUTER SOFTWARE 1.0H. TECHNICAL DRAWING /ARCHITECTURAL & INDUSTRIAL DESIGN 1.0

I. PATENTS 2.0J. CREATIVE WORKSJ1 Major original creative work 1.0J2 Minor original creative work 0.2J3 Poems 0.1K. OTHER REPORT 0‡

L. CONFERENCE PUBLICATIONS – Distributed / minor conferences

L1 Full written paper – refereed 0‡

L2 Full written paper - non-refereed / abstract reviewed 0‡

L3 Extract of paper 0‡

L4 Edited Volume of Conference Proceedings 0‡

M. MEDIA ARTICLE 0‡

‡Submissions not audited*Score of 1.0 for the first chapter in a book. Subsequent chapters score less.

RESEARCH OUTPUT CATEGORIES AND WEIGHTINGS

5

Research Publications Collection

CategoryInternal Weight

DIISR Score

A1 Books - Authored – research 7.0 5.0B1 Book chapter 1.0 1.0*C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal 1.0 1.0E1 Full written paper – refereed 1.0 1.0*Score of 1.0 for the first chapter in a book. Subsequent chapters score less.

RESEARCH OUTPUT CATEGORIES AND WEIGHTINGS

http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/admin/pubs/

6

Journals – where to publish?

seek the advice of an experienced colleague check the journals listed in the references of

articles you already have search the Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory

7

http://ulrichsweb.com/UlrichsWeb/

8

Journals – where to publish?

seek the advice of an experienced colleague check the journals listed in the references of

articles you already have search the Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory consider journal impact/ranking factors

9

Journal impact/ranking factors

refereed is considered better than not

certain journals develop a reputation for ‘quality’

journal quality is an illusive/elusive characteristic

journal impact/ranking factors are one attempt to quantify journal quality

10

http://admin-apps.isiknowledge.com/JCR/JCR

11

http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php

12

Journal impact factors – imperfect

Impact factors and rankings derived from them are not a perfect science! But…

a convenient, publicly available (if imperfect) metric of journal quality/ranking

will inevitably be used as part of any external national research assessment exercise

may be used by your Faculty for internal purposes

13

Journals – where to publish?

seek the advice of an experienced colleague check the journals listed in the references of

articles you already have search the Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory consider journal impact factors consider ERA rankings

14

ERA journal ranking (still relevant!)

Excellence in Research for Australia

http://www.arc.gov.au/era/default.htm

Draft journal ranking list

A* ≈top 5%A ≈next 15%B ≈next 25%C the rest ≈55% (Unranked)

15

ERA journal ranking - Education

1300 Education

1301 Education Systems

1302 Curriculum and Pedagogy

1303 Specialist Studies in Education

All up, 795 journals ranked under ‘1300s’

46 A* journals

113 A journals

Many (>≈100) other discipline education journals ranked as well

16

Journal rankings - general

Not all ‘good’ journals are high ranked

But ‘all’ high ranked journals are ‘good’

Ranking is important

Aim for the top, and work down if you have too

If you pitch low you will get published

17

Conferences – general(isations)

Good for profile and networking

But, expensive in money and time

Fully refereed only (unless there’s a reason)

-some international conferences are not

-most ‘serious’ Australian conferences address DEEWR criteria

Don't attend only as a ‘spectator’

Always have at least one paper for presentation

18

Books / book chapters

19

The call for papers

20

Work already done

21

The love job – yes, but not too many

22

The publication syndicate

Palmer, S. and Holt, D. (online early), Examining student satisfaction with wholly online learning, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.

Holt, D. and Palmer, S. (in print), Quality in flexible, online and distance education at Deakin University: from dual mode to integrated mode practices, in Padhi, N. (ed), Total Quality Management Of Distance Education, Routledge: New York.

Palmer, S., Holt, D. and Bray, S. (2008), Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results, British Journal of Educational Technology, v39, n5, pp. 847-858.

Holt, D. and Palmer, S. (2007), Staff exercising ‘choice’; students exercising ‘choice’: wholly online learning at an Australian University, 24th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Singapore.

Palmer, S., White, R. and Holt, D. (2007), Conceptions of Teaching with Integrity Online in Higher Education: a Case in the Field of Engineering, ED-MEDIA 2007, Vancouver. 

23

Two different reviews – same paper

“I picked up this paper expecting to find a detailed investigation of the issues surrounding professional accreditation and distance education in the engineering field in Australia but was greatly disappointed. The paper does deal with the issues of accreditation, but is does so as a polemic. Its evidentiary base is weak and even the arguments that it makes are self-contradictory.”

“This is a valuable contribution to a debate that has not yet truly begun. It is of importance at this critical juncture in the development of higher education where the expertise of distance educators will be called upon to shore up the deficiencies of campus-based programmes.”

24

You can challenge reviewers

“Reviewer 1 questions why learning outcomes/achievement was not used as an outcome/output indicator. As noted by reviewer 1, we have already highlighted the link identified in the literature between learning outcomes and student satisfaction. However, in the project presented here, due to the human research ethics approval process requiring that survey responses be anonymous, we were not able to match survey response data sets with the corresponding individual student academic results. Hence, we are unable to use learning outcomes/achievement as an output indicator directly. Instead, based on the literature, we use self-reported student satisfaction as a proxy for quality of student engagement and learning outcomes/achievement. We have now made the logic of this research methodology more overt in the paper.”

25

Be strategic

plan to write start with quantity, but move to quality

26

Making a start – just do it

27

Be strategic

plan to write start with quantity, but move to qualitywork hardpounce on opportunities take a ‘portfolio’ approach if you have a choice, finish the manuscript finish off what you’ve started

28

Research Pubs Collection – Now DRO!

29

Keep in touch with editors

chase the status of submitted manuscripts

don’t burn your bridges

ERA has been a good ‘talking point’

do manuscript reviews, etc. advance preview of new work and ideas examples of what to do and, what not to do editors remember and appreciate

30

Writing

write with a publication target in mind know their manuscript requirementsEndNote (or whatever) is your friend –

reference librariesEndNote is your friend – style files it can be painful to get startedpractise makes perfectnothing beats sending off a manuscript……except getting it accepted!

31

Thank you for your time