Dear all,
Terrence Love stated: "There simply isn't enough journals in design
research" and asked for 'thoughts'.
There is a clear practical conflict between 'the need to publish' and
the available capacity.
A very practical solution is to focus a part of the PhD on 'editing
and reviewing'. Although PhD-students must be able to publish towards
the end of their studies, it is far more important that they are
familiar with the absolute details of the publishing process.
Reviewing and editing papers will introduce PhD-students to several issues:
- contents: is it new enough? (and how do I check that?)
- language: is it publishable and is it clear (and how do I check that?)
- presentation: can these results be presented better? (and how do I
check that?)
- are the references suitable and appropriate? (and how do I check that?)
+ all practical issues (file formats, deadlines, personality clashes, ...)
At the moment, the editing and reviewing of papers and conferences is
done as an unpaid spare time activity. (Aren't Sunday mornings and
long flights great for reviews?) This has reached its limits.
Terry mentioned large numbers of papers. Each would require at least
two reviewers and some time to edit before publication. Finding
suitable reviewers and editors has always been very difficult. The
figures Terry gave make this practically impossible.
It is fairly easy to teach and evaluate a PhD-students developments
and achievements in reviewing and editing. 'How many papers did you
review?', 'How many conference presentations?', 'Can you show exactly
what you did?: original draft, your comments, second draft, your
comments, published paper.' It is also fairly easy to interpret the
Bologna publishing standard/DEST points/RAE in this way. It should
not be: 'the number of publications in selected journals', but 'the
involvement in academic publishing, as shown in reviewing, editing
AND publishing'.
Of course, PhD students must publish - it is part of an academic
training. However, a PhD cannot depend on the number of published
papers. The time-span of a PhD rarely matches publishing schedules
and editors should not be put under pressure to 'publish before the
viva'. Alternatively, the starting dates of PhDs should not be
determined by academic years, but by the deadlines of academic
journals.
Kind regards,
Karel.
[log in to unmask]
|