Quality Control in Scholarly Publishing. What are the Alternatives to Peer Revie
Smith, Julie, Managing Editor has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Quality Control in Scholarly Publishing. What are the Alternatives to Peer Review William Y. Arms Cornell University This talk is about: How can readers recognize good quality materials How can publishers maintain high st in addition to ards in addition to let readers know This talk is not about: What criteria should libraries use in selecting materials What criteria should universities use in promoting faculty
This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal
But we must consider: How can a scientist build a reputation outside the traditional peer-reviewed journals A sample of one: William Y. Arms Today’s students: (a) High school Primary sources are Yahoo Science in addition to about.com (b) University Primary source is Google “Please can I use the web I don’t do libraries.” Anonymous Cornell student, circa 1996.
All that glisters is not gold. And vice versa. Current Quality Strategy 1: The Reader Looks as long as Clues Internal clues can in as long as m an experienced reader Publisher, ACM, is a well-known scientific society that follows st in addition to ard procedures as long as peer review. Editor-in-chief is a well-known professor in a strong department. Papers in theoretical computer science can be reviewed from their content. Considerations Gold
Looks the same as the Journal of the ACM. but Procedures as long as selecting in addition to reviewing conference papers are loosely controlled. Papers in applications research are difficult to evaluate by superficial reading. Considerations Not gold
Considerations The appearance looks like a draft. Nothing technical from 1981 is current. Who is DARPA anyway yet This is the official definition of IP. Gold Considerations Course materials from a well known university. but Is the faculty member an expert in this field How carefully have these materials been developed Gold Not gold
Considerations The appearance looks like a joke. “xxx” in the URL is suspicious. Why does it have a “.gov” name yet This is the working literature of physics research. Gold Current Quality Strategy 2: The Publisher as Creator Materials are written by authors or selected by curators who are employed by the publisher. Quality is tied to the reputation of the publisher.
Current Quality Strategy 3: External Readers Chosen by the Publisher Publishers ask external experts to review materials
Observations about Peer Review At its best, it is superb. At its worst, it validates junk. Some topics can be reviewed from a paper, e.g., mathematics. Some topics cannot be reviewed from a paper, e.g., computer systems. “Whatever you do, write a paper. Some journal will publish it.” Advice to young faculty member, University of Sussex, 1972. Current Quality Strategy 4: Independent Reviews Reviewers, hopefully independent of the author in addition to publisher, describe their opinion of the item. Value of the review to the user depends on (a) the reputation of where the review is published in addition to (b) how well it is done.
Quality Control in Scholarly Publishing. What are the Alternatives to Peer Review William Y. Arms Cornell University
Smith, Julie Managing Editor
Smith, Julie is from United States and they belong to Construction Business Owner and they are from Birmingham, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Smith, Julie deal with the subjects like Business
Journal Ratings by Ecole Nationale Suprieure des Arts et Industries Textiles
This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Ecole Nationale Suprieure des Arts et Industries Textiles and short form of this particular Institution is FR and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.