Reflections on: Collaboration of the Faculties– Adventures in Interdisciplinarity

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/

British Academy event for early career researchers explores some exciting and innovative thinking about interdisciplinary working and research.

Hyperbole is omnipresent in Linked.In posts, to a routinely and often nauseating superfluidity, but for once when I posted last week about being ‘delighted’, ‘honoured’ and ‘inspired’ by an event I attended: this was quite simply the honest truth. Last Friday (6^th Feb) I had the genuine pleasure to head into London to the prestigious British Academy’s Westminster headquarters to attend their Early Career Researcher Network’s event entitled Collaboration of the Faculties - Adventures in Interdisciplinarity. This intriguingly titled event promised to explore the challenges of combining differing perspectives and methodologies, dissemination of interdisciplinary work and how to engage audiences across the disciplines. No small challenge!

I’d been approached way back in March this year by Paula Back, the BA’s ECR Network Officer, to get involved as a panellist. I realised from the outset, rather gratifyingly, I was one of the first people who’d been approached, which was a rare treat. Since then, there’s been a regular stream of conversation from the organisers which I’ve been privy too as they built up to the event. It felt very inclusive, and welcoming, to be included in this, rather the often-distant communications one has when speaking at other events! Certainly, I will say the planning organisation and delivering of this researcher development event was pretty much close to my personal ideal, and everyone involved should be commended for it!

On the day, the first thing that struck me was how welcoming and engaged everyone present was. I know most of the audience, beyond the speakers, are self-selected – those who have decided to attend. Yet, the resultant audience was so receptive you’d almost suspect they’d be carefully chosen to attend based on their willingness to engage! Certainly, at many conferences I’ve attended, many people head off into their cliques or friendship groups, to the exclusion of a wider conversation. Being somewhat of a wallflower [1] I sometimes find it challenging to network and have wider discussions as a result. This wasn’t a problem at the BA event, as I barely stopped talking for the entire event run time [2.] Frankly, by the end of the day, I was ready to go silent for some hours and simply let my brain start to reflect on the event.

Now, I’m not going to try and capture a blow-by-blow account of the day. There were so many excellent speakers, questions and side-discussions that it would take me far too long to recount. Not to mention, I’m sure there are better scribes than I out there who will have written a fuller accounting [3]. What I will share though are some of my key takeaways that have resonated with me over the weekend – in no order of priority!

Language barriers: A common theme was the difficulty of speaking to non-domain experts about your research or work, without using terms which are at worst opaque, or where you end up explaining them in other domain terms. Not ideal! When attempting to apply for funding or forming an effective interdisciplinary research teams, it is exactly these sorts of linguistic barriers which can create a genuine challenge to team cohesion and effectiveness. These sorts of barriers are perhaps even more apparent when scholars consider outlining their research or its outcomes to the public or to members of policy sphere and political classes.

Identity: A personal quandary for many researchers seeking to move to an interdisciplinary space or sphere of working. HEIs and senior executives continue to express their keenness for researchers to be more interdisciplinary in their working and practice. However, many of the esteem markers and career progression mechanisms are simply not configured to recognise or authenticate the ‘value’ of such work. Domain specific research remains more ‘significant’ in terms of these esteem markers, which means in terms of establishing an identity and even a career as an interdisciplinary researcher it can be a major uphill struggle with a slower progression to the senior grades. This was an area within which a number of speakers highlighted the importance of policy makers in changing perceptions and the lived reality.

Power Dysfunctions: A theme common to me from my own publishing research, but the existence of power dynamic imbalances are an issue even within interdisciplinary researcher groups. We’ve all encountered the ‘powerful’ and ‘dominant’ PI. Yet, broadly speaking, when groups of researchers come from across the disciplines to tackle a common problem scientists will typically view a problem from a certain vantage point or precept to those in the humanities, for example. Now, whomever is the driving or vocal force within the group – hierarchically speaking or simply by force of personality, can artificially close off exactly the kind of exciting, original or novel paths of exploration which interdisciplinary working is supposed to enable. As one speaker put it ‘to the [man] with the hammer, every problem looks like a nail’. [4] Overcoming this, can mean serious changes to underlying research culture too, another topic within which I’m heartily familiar.

Show Don’t Tell: When seeking to engage audiences around novel interdisciplinary-related concepts, methodologies or approaches – be they fellow researchers, the public, media or policy makers – ‘show don’t tell’ is a great approach [5]. It can help overcome some of those language barriers mentioned above, but can also help the interdisciplinary researcher by ‘forcing’ them to recontextualise their own work and potentially see it in a fresh light. Quite simply, by finding new ways to engage with audiences (and have audiences engage themselves) simply having objects, exhibits or interactive interventions can ensure a greater degree of success than simply seeking to ‘explain’ an interdisciplinary idea, research, method or methodology.

The Future is Interdisciplinary: ‘Complex real-world problems require interdisciplinary solutions’ as one speaker succinctly put it. When you look at global problems – climate change, space-exploration, healthcare etc., – there is no singular research domain that has the complete picture or solution. Working across boundaries, brining knowledge, expertise and ability from across the interdisciplinary spectrum is key to creating effective, practical leavers to affect successful change or outcomes. Getting this degree of buy in (and appreciating some of the challenges mentioned above) though, is still a journey: not everyone is ready, willing or able to step out of their disciplinary silo. Yet. Perhaps in a decade or so this might be a more natural expectation – look at the move towards open publishing for example – but for now, disciplinarity remains the realpolitik and de facto ruling principles of the academy.

Connectivity is Key: I would argue the event itself was this connectivity made manifest, but in achieving this effective interdisciplinary working future for researchers and society, finding people who are likeminded, who are willing to step beyond the disciplinary and helping to support and enable each other is key goal. Fresh and exciting perspectives await!

Alongside this exciting stuff, I was speaking myself about Exchanges and our role in facilitating interdisciplinary publishing – without any myopic application of ‘true’ or ‘authentic’ interdisciplinary research: we remain catholic, welcoming and all-encompassing in our approach. I was gratified to have such a positive feedback from the audience to my comments and answers to questions, as well as the delegates and organisers I spoke to throughout the day, about Exchanges’ rationale and approach. I hope in our own, modest, way we can help engender the kinds of exchanges (#sorrynotsorry) which the British Academy event was seeking to enable through this event. Certainly, from a more pragmatic standpoint, as more than one potential author spoke to me on the day and subsequently about future article ideas, I’m excited to see what fresh perspectives we can help bring to global attention in our forthcoming issues.

---

My grateful thanks to everyone attending, who asked a question and of course the British Academy for the invite to get involved in the first place. I had a simply terrific day, and I suspect a version of this blog post will be appearing as a future editorial in Exchanges itself! So, I was certainly inspired too.

---

Endnotes

[1] No, honestly, I am. Despite appearances to the contrary.

[2] Except, naturally, during the presentations.

[3] Of course if anyone would like to submit a critical reflection article on the events and speakers of the day, I’d be more than happy to consider it for publication!

[4] I work with a lot of scientists, and this feels very true to me – there’s always a positivist viewpoint that is privileged over others – frustrating!

[5] And one I’ve long loved from screenwriting theory and practice, I should note.

Gareth Johnson : Today 10:38 |  Tags: Academy British Career Early Event Interdisciplinarity Network Researcher |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Journal Server Upgrades for Future Developments

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/63

The week beginning 2^nd September sees changes to Exchanges server and potential brief downtime.

Due to a planned server migration for Exchanges, and the other Warwick University Press Journals, during the first week of September there is a possibility that access to the site may be restricted. While we’re awaiting an update to learn more about the exact timings – I suspect it won’t be across the entire week – I thought it was worth highlighting the issue for all our author and reader community.

Practically, what this means is that there may be periods of time during the week beginning 2^nd September when readers, reviewers and indeed editors (and myself) won’t be able to either login or access Exchanges. Our apologies in advance for any issues this creates, but as we’re out of term time our hope is that this is the least disruptive time to stage this work.

As it happens the reason behind this work is due to a migration of the servers on which all of the WUPJs are mounted, and an incoming new company who will be looking after hosting, maintaining and supporting the service. This is quite exciting to hear, as it looks like this opens up the potential for enabling future platform developments and improvements for the journal. We’ll be working with our colleagues in the University Library and other journal editors to explore this in the coming weeks, and doubtless I’ll have more to share on the subject once I have it.

In the meantime, our thanks for bearing with us as we go through this transitionary phase!

Gareth Johnson : 20 Aug 2024 11:35 |  Tags: Announcement Future IT Migration Platform Server Support Upgrades |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Research Culture Special Issue Goes Live

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/99

August brings with it the biggest ever issue of Exchanges

I was writing my Linked.In post about the new issue of Exchanges, and I realised for once there was no hyperbole in what I was writing. I am most certainly genuinely thrilled to announce the culmination of 11 months of work with some fantastic authors and editors to bring our first ever Research Culture special issue to publication. You can read the issue with its 32 articles inspired by or drawn from the International Research Culture Conference (IRCC) 2023 here:

• https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/99
• (or once the DOI has fully registered - https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v11i3)

I am also not exaggerating when I say there are some very preeminent scholars, thinkers and practitioners represented in this issue, which makes it all the more exciting to have them in our pages. Working with the editors, and of course our issue partners at the National Centre for Research Culture (NCRC) at Warwick has been a lot of hard work, but mostly a very efficient process. While this is a HUGE issue (and achievement) it has by no means been the most challenging special issue to have worked on, and for that I am grateful.

While this publication marks the culmination of nearly a year of activity, I’m already in the early stages of preparing the way for the IRCC ’24 conference and the special issue which we’ll be producing from that too. Thankfully that issue will be 12 months from now, and I’ve around 4 or 5 other issues to support in the meantime (MRC@50 especially as that’s hopefully coming out next month). Will the next issue be as big – or as Prof Kita Sotaro (NCRC Director) suspects even bigger? I can’t say for sure right now, but going on my experiences with this one – it wouldn’t be much of surprise if it is!

Guess I’d best get recruiting some more associate editors soon then…

Naturally, my gracious thanks to the NCRC, all my editors and every single contributing author for their efforts!

Gareth Johnson : 08 Aug 2024 10:38 |  Tags: Announcement Culture Issue Publication Research Special |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Closing Time (Sort of)

Change is afoot for the Exchanges campus office

Closing time, one last call for alcohol, so finish your whiskey or beer. Closing time, you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here. (Semisonic, Closing Time, 1998)

Yes, it has come to this – the Exchanges office is closing down. But before you all start wailing and gnashing your teeth, not to mention organising a quick whip around to buy me a leaving gift [1] I should point out…this is not actually the end.

What is happening though is over here in the IAS where Exchanges is currently based our wonderful department has rather become a victim of our own success. Over the next few months, we’ve got lots of exciting new research fellows coming to join us, and unsurprisingly campus office space is (as always) at a premium. Now, I’ve very much enjoyed my current office, which I moved into during September 2019 [2] – having a space on the main campus to call my own did lend a spot of prestige to the journal. It was easier to arrange to meet people in person too, as I didn’t have to worry about checking if my office mate was in or out – nor did people have to walk a looooong way to find me.

Naturally, not that long after the IAS had moved here to Zeeman the pandemic lockdowns began. As a consequence, I didn’t really see the inside of my office regularly again for a good 18 months. [3] Despite that for the past couple of years I’ve made regular pilgrimages to my office and hosted many people for publishing and educational discussions, so I’ll confess I will miss this place. But…this isn’t the end, merely a point of inflection.

Which is why, today, I’m surrounded by boxes, bits and pieces which are moving along with me (and Exchanges) just down the corridor. This is where I’ll now be office mates with my line manager and the IAS’ associate director – the estimable Dr Fiona Fisher. Personally, I couldn’t wish for a nicer and more supportive fellow office dweller, and I’m looking forward to a range of informative, interesting and possibly amusing conversations in the coming months.

Hence, after today – if you come looking to meet with me on campus – don’t visit my old room of Zeeman of C 0.10 – but instead come along and knock on C 0.05. You’ll be assured of a warm welcome – even if I’m not there – as Fiona always likes to say hello too!

And to close as I began, with Semisonic, and the reason I picked this song for this article.

Closing time, every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end, yeah…

---

Endnotes

[1] A new car would be nice, just saying.

[2] Before this I was sharing an office with a researcher over in Milburn House, on the Science Park.

[3] Being part time at Warwick, and with the pandemic it still feels like I’ve only just arrived here – despite it being the best part of 5 years ago since we transitioned here.

Gareth Johnson : 07 Aug 2024 10:30 |  Tags: Moves New Office Relocation |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

More Frequently Asked Questions

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/FAQ

The annual revision to Exchanges FAQ has finished – is your question there?

It may be the summer – although looking at the weather currently I’d be hard pressed to confirm that – which means, normally, it’s time for me to pick up on all the annual update tasks. This year though I’m hard at work trying to get our next two special issues out the door, which means I’ve got a lot less time and attention available for this sort of administrative delight. That said, this week I thought it was time to do a little spring (summer?) cleaning on our Frequently Asked Questions page. It might not be the most heavily visited part of our site, but I believe it collates a range of highly useful advice based on the sort of specific questions I get week in and week out from our contributors.

I was inspired to update it based on an excellent question I was asked by someone recently about funder acknowledgements. Incidentally, in recent years I’ve been increasingly encouraging our authors to think about this sort of information, as I’d been surprised how few of them seem to offer an acknowledgement as a matter of course. Now part of the solution would be to make it a semi-mandated field in the manuscript submission process. Given I’m not going to be able to make any changes on that any time soon [1], I thought adding something about it to the FAQ would make a suitable stab at gentle encouragement.

Of course, being the kind of person I am, once I’d tweaked one answer on the FAQ, I realised how long it had been since I last systematically updated it. By which I mean, I couldn’t honestly remember if I had ever updated the FAQ. Which I wasn’t overly happy with, and hence it became a key task for the week. So, one print out later I sat in my office with my editing blue pen [2] going through the list of questions and their answers, and in a few cases creating a few new ones to add in. Now, I am not going to suggest that all the answers to everyone’s questions are there now – but I think 80% of what I am asked regularly can now be found on the FAQ page, or indeed by following the links to the various other reams of guidance we make available for contributors.

Will it stop people asking me directly? No, and to be fair, I hope not: a bit of human interaction is always a good thing. If nothing else it helps provide a source of insight into the sort of information we need to be providing or clarifying for our contributors. I do hope though that the page as it stands offers a reliable source of information and perhaps even relief to our current and potential future contributors!

Naturally, if you’ve got a great question that’s not yet represented on the page – drop me a line. I’ll be only too happy to add it into our collection!

---

Endnotes

[1] That is unless the IT Services and Library teams suddenly surprise me with hitherto unavailable developmental time. I am ever hopeful they will!

[2] Normally I edit in red or green ink, but the blue pen was to hand. #FascinatingFacts

Gareth Johnson : 25 Jul 2024 15:51 |  Tags: Asked Author Faq Frequently Information ITS Questions Updates Website |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Exchanges Site Restored

Exchanges was regretfully offline for a short while.

The Exchanges website is currently (7am, Wed 26th June) offline. We have flagged this with Warwick IT who will doubtless be able to resolve it in the near future. In the meantime, thank you for you patience as we deal with this. I'll update this entry periodically as things develop/are resolved.

9:00: Having to spoken with the editors of two other Warwick-based journals, it looks like this issue has impacted on their titles as well.

11:00: While the site is still offline, an IT team has been assigned to work on the issue. We wish them well in their efforts.

13:00: Confirmed the server hosting Exchanges (and other journals) had an overnight problem, and work is ongoing on restoring it and the various sites hosted on it.

27th June

9:00: Unfortunately, it looks like the solution for the problem is taking longer than was first hoped. I hope to have more news to update on the matter soon as the IT team has been working hard on resolving it. Apologies in the meantime for our unanticipated downtime.

11:00: Delighted to announce that the Exchanges site has now been fully restored! Our thanks to all at IDG and the Library involved in this work.

Gareth Johnson : 26 Jun 2024 08:27 |  Tags: Downtime Error Offline Restored |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Open Call for Papers: Updated Guidance for Authors

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/62

Updated open call for papers page offers authors a fresh perspective on submitting their manuscripts for consideration to Exchanges.

I thought it was high time I did a refresh of the guidance for authors looking to submit a paper to us. As long time readers know, Exchanges has an open call for papers whereby we’re interested in considering work throughout the year. Yes, we do have those various special issue calls as well, and the occasional themed section call too, but the heart of many issues of Exchanges has been created by authors answering our open call. As I last updated the open call information, significantly, back in 2022, the time was ripe for a refresh.

You can read it here:

https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/62

In creating this new version I’ve been asking various questions about the sort of information authors want to see – and having a splendid conversation with an academic colleague about what they’d like us to include. This has really helped me shape the new version of the call. While it replicates information you’ll find all over the Exchanges site, bringing it together in a single page I think is especially helpful for those authors who stumble across our site in their hunt for a suitable journal to publish within. Sadly, I don’t have any stats to give me an idea of how many people have read the old version of the open call, but I do know from talking to successful authors that more than one of them first found us through a web search and reading the open call information. So, there’s clearly a value to the journal in terms of keeping a flow of potential manuscripts in maintaining this particular announcement well.

Does it contain everything you’d like to know as an author? Probably not, but if you think there’s anything we’ve missed – leave me a comment or get in touch to let us know. Who knows, that might be the start of your own publishing journey too!

Gareth Johnson : 19 Jun 2024 12:08 |  Tags: Announcements Call Journal News Open Papers Submissions |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

By General Acknowledgement

What do authors write in their article acknowledgements? The answer may surprise you!

I found myself having a discussion with a colleague yesterday, one who hails from the STEM fields, about the role which acknowledgements play in academic papers. I had been commenting how intrigued I’d been by the extensive, structured and sub-sectioned series of acknowledgments I’d witnessed in a paper I was reading earlier that day. Now my colleague works in a medical-adjacent field these days and they were less surprised. They pointed out to me ‘Well, there is a standard form you’re expected to contribute – don’t the UKRI have rules about this?’

All that aside, this conversation got me thinking. While some journals or fields will have a particular tradition or requirement in terms of what must be stated in your paper’s acknowledgments we have no such requirement for acknowledgement in an Exchanges article. I do however encourage editors as they pass manuscripts through the final stages of copyediting, pre-publication, to remind and encourage authors to add them if wished. I have no figures, but if if I were to hazard an educated guess, I’d say less than half of our final papers have acknowledgements in them. This lack of directed imperative though might be emblematic of the Exchanges’ heritage. Some of our authors thank their reviewers and editors, some their non-directly-contributing colleagues, supervisors or general collaborators. A few do, it is true, directly thank their funders. A very few gracious souls even thank me [1]. Where funders are thanked, I’ve made it a policy to include this statement on the landing page of the article, so that hopefully search engines can easily find it, along with any casual readers. Afterall, very little research [2] is conducted without an injection of capital from some organisation or the other.

Now, Exchanges as a journal was founded by a multitude of interdisciplinary scholars. However, over the years for whatever reason, our editorial base has a pronounced tendency to skew more to the arts, humanities and social sciences. This said, when last I recruited actively for our Board, I made sure to add in more from the scientific disciplines to try and redress that balance a little more. Nevertheless, I suspect my colleague’s comments about acknowledgement practices were accurate more for the STEM disciplines than those with which I am personally more familiar would be no great surprise [3]. Science papers more commonly than those in the humanities for example have multiple authors, who likely contribute to different sections (results, analysis, methods etc.,). Where we do have multiple authors from the arts and humanities, my impression is such contributions are more evenly distributed throughout a manuscript. I could of course, be mistaken!

Nevertheless, the question remains what guidance, advice or requirements does the UKRI [4] set in place then? Hidden in their catchily titled UK Research and Innovation FEC grants: standard terms and conditions of grant document (item RCG 12.4) it reads:

Publications and other forms of media communication, including media appearances, press releases and conferences, must acknowledge the support received from Us [UKRI], quoting the Grant reference number if appropriate.

There’s also a link to a page which outlines guidance in terms of the specific phrasing too.[5] However, nothing there about declaring who wrote what, and how many people you should thank. I suspect in general practice this comes down to individual journals to make such stipulations or requirements. I would be loathed to do this for Exchanges, not for the extra workload in terms of defining the policy [6] – but rather because making additional requirements feels like adding yet another hurdle for authors. The more streamlined and effective we can make their publishing experience, the better, I would argue. Should we introduce more formal acknowledgement requirements for contributors though? I’d be interested in readers thoughts in the comments below – or drop me a line.

So, for now, who, what and how you acknowledge in your paper for Exchanges is very much in the author’s court. Keeping those who helped and supported you out on side is always a good plan, because who doesn’t like to see their own name in print? It’s also a handy guide, retrospectively as you pass through your career, to look back at earlier articles and spot names who once played a closer role in your research. [7] Although, as detailed above, you’d do well to double check with what your funder wants! Keeping them happy, could be the key to keeping a strong record of successful grant acquisition!

---

Endnotes

[1] Which I’ll acknowledge here, is very kind of them and I am deeply touched when authors do this.

[2] Some is though, and we’ve certainly published a few independent scholars over the years who have self-funded their efforts. Never in the sciences mind you!

[3] These days at least – I began my academic career as a biomedical research scientist, truth be told.

[4] The UK research councils, source of much of today’s research funding.

[5] Glancing at the Wellcome Trust, their acknowledgement phrasing is near identical. I suspect that means most, if not all, major UK funders follow a similar pattern. But don’t take my word for it – check your own funder!

[6] Ideally, putting an acknowledgement box as part of the submission wizard would be useful, but making changes to OJS’ implementation is, regrettably, still beyond us currently until the Warwick University Press sorts out a lot of long pending support and infrastructure questions.

[7] To the best of my knowledge, no one has, yet, thanked their pet gerbil or ferret for contributions above and beyond in our pages. I suspect this is a situation which may one day be challenged.

Gareth Johnson : 29 May 2024 14:26 |  Tags: Acknowlegements Advice Formatting Funders Guidance Submissions Thanking |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Early Stage Researchers, Peer Review and Editorial Skills Reflections

Reflecting back on early stage researcher training, and thinking about where it might go next year.

Last week I took part in the final workshop of this academic session’s Early Stage Researchers programme. As readers may recall, I’ve been contributing to this programme for the past two years and pop up during the session focussing on publication. My role here is to firstly contribute to the general discussions led by the estimated Harriet Richmond, who facilitates the programme as a whole with great skill. I’m also on-hand to present my own thoughts, reflections and experience on the subtle art of journal editing and peer-reviewing: something about which I do know a thing or two. I will note as well that the session delegates this times were particularly engaged and engaging, which meant contributing was even more of a genuine pleasure than normal.

Now like any good lecturer. each time I’ve presented this session my notes, slides and interactions have subtly evolved. This time around was different. Although I wasn’t planning a major overhaul, alongside a few informational updates, I did find myself doing a revision of the running order for my slides which I felt made for a more coherent narrative. [1] Certainly the reactions in the room on the day were positive, so I’ll take that as a win.

As I have 30 minutes to specifically contribute during the three-hour session, I do like to break up my monologue with some small interactive engagements. These breaks are partly to keep everyone’s attention because the programme is taught online, but also because not even I want to keep hearing my own voice for 30 unbroken minutes: I suspect the session delegates might agree with that point too. As Harriet deploys a lot of breakout group work during her own segments, I didn’t want to adapt the same approach, being ever mindful of offering a variety of content and engagement opportunities. I also realised that even a brief 10-15 minute breakout and any reporting back would use up most of my time. Much as it might create some interesting conversations, I concluded it did seem to be the most effective way to offer a rich vein of content to the delegates.

The first exercise which focussed on delegate perceptions of editorial key skills, and mapping them back to their own attitudes, has worked well as an ice breaker for a few iterations of my session now. I am certainly quite pleased about how it’s worked, so don’t feel there is any great need to change it up – currently anyway. Conversely, the peer-reviewer exercise I’ve used, which is where I got delegates to rank a number of statements on an axis never quite clicked the way I hoped it would. I’ve concluded while a useful tool, it is actually an exercise which would probably work better in a physical classroom environment - somewhere where we could dig into the perceptions and reactions in a lot more detail and perhaps spark off some debate. Hence, this time I decided to retired this venerable session tool, and move to a new intervention.

This new excersise centred on the introduction of some peer-reviewer case study conundrums – based on real world examples I’ve encountered – and then asked the delegates to offer their own solutions. Given most of the delegates had limited peer-reviewing experience, I estimated how exposing them to some real-world challenges would better contextualise what I had to say about reviewing praxis in the rest of the talk. Obviously, I had example answers on hand for how I actually approached the reviewing challenges, but I was delighted to see the delegates really getting to grips with these: in some cases offering some very enlightened solutions.

Notably, as I’d been talking through the ideas of ‘ethical reviewing practices’ just ahead of the exercise, I was rather hoping they might step away from purely functional answers and offer solutions embracing these sort of practices. I am pleased to report in this and other regards the exercise seemed to be a success. It also served to spark some ideas in my mind for a longer peer-review focussed workshop [2] alongside helping shape an excellent discussion among the delegate group. Indeed, I’ve also been talking to one or two them post-event about these areas, so I’m definitely happy with how it worked in engendering some great conversations.

Anyway, as the next iteration of this course isn’t now until the autumn term I can safely retire my notes for now. Well, – aside from thinking at the back of my head quite how I’ll reshape my contribution for the next version [3].

---

Endnotes

[1] Since imploring authors for a coherent narrative is a common feedback request I send out, I thought I should really practice what I preach here.

[2] Perhaps this might pop up in Accolade or elsewhere. Who knows – not overly sure I’ve sufficient time currently to really develop it anyway. Maybe if there’s a big demand for it from the researcher community…

[3] And this is assuming I’m asked back to contribute to the programme. I do hope so, but nothing’s set in stone!

Gareth Johnson : 21 May 2024 16:28 |  Tags: Early Peer-Review Reflections Researchers Stage Training Workshops |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Episode: In Conversation with Simona Di Martino

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/podcast

After a break the first in a new series of Exchanges podcast episodes goes live.

It’s been a while since our last episode – mainly because I’ve been focussed in supporting our numerous special issues and editors over this time, and also because we’ve been awaiting a new issue of the journal. Now that’s out, I’ve been chatting informally with a few of the authors about coming onto the podcast to talk about their lives, research and publications – so hopefully a few more episodes are on their way.

Before that though, I was delighted to be approached by one of the IAS’ associate fellows to talk about a conference she was recently involved in hosting. While for once this isn’t directly related to any publications or issues of Exchanges, I think you’ll find there’s a strong resonance with a number of the projects we’ve got underway for future special issues.

Listen in here (or on most major podcast platforms):

Voices of Transnational Girlhood(s) on Identity, Gender, and Culture: In Conversation with Simona Di Martino [22:23]

This episode we talk with Associate Fellow ⁠Simona Di Martino⁠ (⁠@SimoDiMa1⁠) about the ⁠recent conference event⁠ she organised at Warwick which tackled questions of girlhood, transnationalism, identify, gender and culture. We talk about the challenges and delights of hosting such an event, and Simona reflects on the emergent themes and key messages discussed by the participants. Girlhood is, Simona argues, a neglected area of study, making an event such as this not just a crucial forum for current scholars, but a way to energise and enthuse the next generation of researchers in the topic.

Podcasts of the conference talks will be coming soon on the conference site.

Gareth Johnson : 08 May 2024 09:25 |  Tags: Conference Episode Girlhood New Podcast |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem