The Ideal Review Process Is a Three-Way Street

In response to the increasing difficulty of obtaining high quality peer reviews, our invited paper describes the concept of review avoidance and why this phenomenon occurs. In reaffirming the professional responsibilities and potential benefits of reviewing, we also emphasize the interdependent nature of the ideal peer review process. We suggest that the review process is a three-way street where the respective roles and responsibilities of authors, editors and editorial teams, and reviewers are inextricably linked. We present thematic illustrations of undesirable reviewer comments, and a brief synthesis of broad themes in the literature on high-quality reviewing. The synthesis is complemented by a master reviewer’s fine-grained perspective on crafting high quality reviews. A final Appendix presents additional sources that may be informative for prospective reviewers, submitting authors, and those mentors and colleagues who may wish to provide guidance and training to them

“Excellence R Us”: university research and the fetishisation of excellence

The rhetoric of “excellence” is pervasive across the academy. It is used to refer to research outputs as well as researchers, theory and education, individuals and organisations, from art history to zoology. But does “excellence” actually mean anything? Does this pervasive narrative of “excellence” do any good? Drawing on a range of sources we interrogate “excellence” as a concept and find that it has no intrinsic meaning in academia. Rather it functions as a linguistic interchange mechanism. To investigate whether this linguistic function is useful we examine how the rhetoric of excellence combines with narratives of scarcity and competition to show that the hypercompetition that arises from the performance of “excellence” is completely at odds with the qualities of good research. We trace the roots of issues in reproducibility, fraud, and homophily to this rhetoric. But we also show that this rhetoric is an internal, and not primarily an external, imposition. We conclude by proposing an alternative rhetoric based on soundness and capacity-building. In the final analysis, it turns out that that “excellence” is not excellent. Used in its current unqualified form it is a pernicious and dangerous rhetoric that undermines the very foundations of good research and scholarship

“Enriching Lives within Sedimentary Geology”: Actionable Recommendations for Making SEPM a Diverse, Equitable and Inclusive Society for All Sedimentary Geologists

Innovative science benefits from diversity of thought and influence at all waypoints along the scientific journey, from early education to career-length contributions in research and mentorship. Scientific societies, like the Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM), steward their innovators and the direction of the science, thereby defining the societal impact and evolution of a discipline. They are uniquely positioned to promote the representation and success of all scientists, including those from minoritized populations, through proactive advocacy, and inclusive mentorship, awards, and leadership. We introspectively review available records of SEPM membership, leadership, awardees, and editorial boards to identify areas for growth and begin a dialogue about how the society and its members can work together to better reflect our community. In the last decade, SEPM has seen a decline in membership, while representation and recognition of scientists from minoritized groups has remained low. Awards and honors have overwhelmingly gone to men, even in the last ten years, and very few women or people of color are in leadership roles. SEPM has recently taken positive steps towards becoming more inclusive (e.g., the Code of Professional Conduct); however, much more work is needed. We provide recommendations for swift actions that SEPM and its members should undertake for the society to become a diverse, inclusive, and equitable environment where all scientists thrive. The systemic changes needed will take continuous effort, which must be shared by all of us, to build an enduring legacy that we can be proud of

Current Challenges to Educational Leadership & Administration: An International Survey Report on the Pilot Survey

Published in the UCEA Review, Summer 2018. It was also published in 2017 as a stand-alone report (entered into the RIS)