Beagon, Una

Bernhard, Jonte

Chance, Shannon

Edström, Kristina

Male, Sally

Mitchell, John

Nikolic, Sasha

Roach, Kate

English

UCL Discovery

50th Annual Conference in September 20222271Kristina Edström, John Mitchell, Sally Male, Jonte Bernhard, Shannon Chance, Sasha Nikolic, Kate Roach and Una BeagonReviewing Manuscripts in Engineering Education R search Journals: fairly, constructively, ef-fec ively - 10.5821/conference-9788412322262.1475doi:10.5821/conference-9788412322262.14751475 Workshop final version  Kristina Edström, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, kristina@kth.se John Mitchell, University College London, j.mitchell@ucl.ac.uk Sally Male, University of Melbourne, sally.male@unimelb.edu.au Jonte Bernhard, Linköping University, jonte.bernhard@liu.se Shannon Chance, TU Dublin, shannon.chance@tudublin.ie Sasha Nikolic, University of Wollongong, sasha@uow.edu.au Kate Roach, University College London, katherine.roach@ucl.ac.uk Una Beagon, TU Dublin, una.beagon@tudublin.ie  Reviewing Manuscripts in Engineering Education Research Journals: fairly, constructively, effectively  This session focuses on the peer review of journal manuscripts in the field of engineering education research. To the workshop we invite both experienced and new reviewers, and especially doctoral students in engineering education research.  The function of the peer review process is first to support fair decisions by helping journal editors identify which manuscripts most deserve to be published. The task is further to constructively support the authors in improving their manuscript before publication. It is through this process of selection and enhancement that the quality of the journal papers is safeguarded. By extension, this is how the whole research field cab establish and maintain respect. Therefore, reviewers play a vital role – without peer review there can be no respected field.  It is a rewarding task to review manuscripts, as a lot can be learned from it. Not least when taking one’s own manuscript from submission to successful publication, it is helpful to have experience of the editorial process also from the inside. However, reviewing can also be time consuming, making it a wise investment to improve one’s skills to do it effectively.  After the workshop, participants will be able to: • Explain different quality criteria for scholarship in engineering education, and how to apply them  • Highlight particular aspects of a manuscript that a reviewer should consider • Discuss how to support editors in making fair decisions and authors in improving their manuscripts • Consider how reviewers can spend their own time wisely   The workshop is facilitated by a team of editors of the leading journals: • European Journal of Engineering Education (SEFI) • IEEE Transactions on Education (IEEE) • Australasian Journal of Engineering Education (AAEE)  Workshop outline Introductions • Brief introductions: participants and session leaders. [5 minutes] 50th Annual Conference in September 20222272• The journals: aims and scope, review criteria and review process. [15 minutes]  Group activity • Make a poster in groups of four: “Advice for reviewers”. [30 minutes] • Vernissage (hanging the posters).  Synthesis • Plenary discussion of results. Editors’ picks. Collected wisdom and conclusions. [30 minutes]  Participants can sign up to receive documentation from the session, and to volunteer as reviewers for the journals. 

Reviewing Manuscripts in Engineering Education Research Journals

https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10165031/1/Reviewing%20Manuscripts%20in%20Engineering%20Education%20Research%20Journals%20SEFI%202022.pdf

Reviewing Manuscripts in Engineering Education Research Journals

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UCL Discovery