After extensive searching on the Internet, I failed to find a venue for Hispanists to share with colleagues their myriad of experiences with publishing, particularly the handling of the review and publication processes by refereed journals. My motive is not to encourage irrational venting sessions for rejected authors, but to prompt an intelligent and useful exchange that might assist scholars with choosing prospective journals that exemplify professionalim and integrity; journals that conduct the entire review process expeditiously and provide authors with useful feedback for improving their manuscripts. Many true horror stories have been shared at academic conferences and within language and literature departments across the country, and these should indeed be shared here to help each other avoid potential pitfalls. Besides assisting our fellow scholars, if this blog also succeeds at ultimately improving the management of certain refereed journals, then many in the profession will benefit.
They provided feedback after a very fast turnaround, although I was surprised by the lack of constructive comments that came with the rejection. One reviewer seemed more concerned about proof-reading small typos than suggesting how to improve the theory of my argument (which was the grounds of their rejection). The other gave no help at all, except managed to point out one example of repetition.
I have worked as a reader for this journal on several occasions and have always been encouraged to give a quick review - something I highly value as I see it to be completely unprofessional to sit on an article for 4+ months. Regarding the feedback, it is equally unprofessional to not give a thorough review, so I can sympathize with the previous poster.
They provided feedback after a very fast turnaround, although I was surprised by the lack of constructive comments that came with the rejection. One reviewer seemed more concerned about proof-reading small typos than suggesting how to improve the theory of my argument (which was the grounds of their rejection). The other gave no help at all, except managed to point out one example of repetition.
ReplyDeleteI have worked as a reader for this journal on several occasions and have always been encouraged to give a quick review - something I highly value as I see it to be completely unprofessional to sit on an article for 4+ months. Regarding the feedback, it is equally unprofessional to not give a thorough review, so I can sympathize with the previous poster.
ReplyDelete