Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBE8kS923905; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 03:46:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 03:46:28 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <008a01c065a9$cbd9c960$09150785@fedu.fukuiu.ac.jp> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Charles Jannuzi" <jannuzi@edu00.f-edu.fukui-u.ac.jp> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:5377] Are refereed journals in language education fair and objective? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 2554 Lines: 50 I just had this experience: a paper I worked long and hard on for much of this year was submitted to ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) in September. I was told it would take a couple of months. More than a couple months passed and there was no contact, so I contacted the editor, Keith Morrow. KM replied quite politely but succinctly that the article, it had been decided, was inappropriate for the audience of ELT Journal (which, whether he meant it or not, was a pretty scathing thing to say about an article meant for language teachers). HOWEVER, no actual explanations or criticisms were given. In another e-mail KM said that this was not possible under blind review. But, of course, this is evasion, because readers' remarks can (AND SHOULD) be forwarded anonymously by the editor. A couple of interesting things about this article. Since it is an attempt to apply a somewhat technical aspect of crosslinguistic knowledge, I think that perhaps a periodical such as ELTJ--however esteemed it might be--doesn't have the expertise on the editorial staff or EAB to deal with the article. Certainly nothing KM wrote implied even the remotest interest in the topic of the paper. Also, KM said that the article received considerable, lengthy discussion, which means what? That, no doubt, the paper was controversial and opinion among the editorial readers was DIVIDED. My point about an article on which opinion divides is this: it might well prove to be the type of article that proves of the most interest to readers, since it may be on to something about which people in ELT have not thought about in depth or about which opinion is strongly divided, and so further discussion and synthesis might help. Something to keep in mind if you ever find yourself editing a periodical and you want to develop your content and your readership. Finally, my last point. Don't believe blind reviewing guarantees objectivity or fairness in treatment. It doesn't. George Braine at Asia Journal of ELT in Hong Kong summarily refused to accept an article from me simply because of earlier trouble over an article by Oda Masaki (which George Braine had edited separately for a book with Lawrence Erlbaum Associates--in the article Oda had confused my views with someone else's, and I had written asking for acknowledgement of the error and correction). Anyone else had similar experiences they care to share? Reply on or off list, I'd love to hear about them. Do such problems exist at any JALT publications? Yours, Charles Jannuzi Fukui University, Japan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:45:15 EST