Special Issues are Like Buses

Behind the scenes at Exchanges right now we’re working hard on preparing for the launch of our first ever special issue, scheduled for very early in 2021. We’re also on the cusp of closing the call for contributions to our second special issue, but it’s not too late (yet) to submit! Meanwhile, I had the pleasure this week to travel down to meet with a couple of friendly academics from SOAS and the University of Oxford (hello Ben, hello Filippo), who wanted to propose a third special issue of Exchanges. This is rather exciting as while we’ve been thoroughly enjoying working with the Warwick and Monash scholars in preparation for the first two special issues, this time the approach has come from outside of Warwick and the IAS’ direct collaborating institutions.

We’re still in the process of finalising the exact theme, although I can reveal that broadly it will fall into the area of ‘interdisciplinary representations and evolutions of narratives of loneliness and nerds’. As a somewhat geeky nerd at heart [1], this rather appealed to me on a personal level. Moreover, the underlying plans to tie this proposed issue into a mid-2020 symposium and ongoing research work from an intrinsically diverse research community forms an especially welcome prospect. Diversity, in terms of geographical origin, research domain and seniority are also another core component of the proposed issue, which should add a wonderful diversity of voice, insight and opinion to the issue.

Incidentally, for Exchanges, working with these scholars absolutely resonates with our desire to continue to evolve away from our early Warwick-centric roots, and become a more integral part of the national and international early-career researcher publishing culture [2].

There’s also the additional bonus, that we will likely be able to engage with external post-graduate researcher communities to join us as associate editors for this issue. Hence, this very much matches our second core mission, to enable developmental experience within scholar-led publishing practice for emerging scholars. It also answers our third, and oft unnoticed, mission – to experiment and explore new publishing models and patterns that are attractive to our contributor community. Someone should really remind me in the new year to get round to formally publishing more about our experiences in this domain.

For Exchanges, this development chimes agreeably with our shift in 2019 towards publishing special issues. We have, in the past, published themed sections, but I strongly believe through offering these focussed individual issues, we’re witnessing the slow evolution of the journal into its second phase of existence. As our esteemed Institute Director, Prof Peter Scott said this new development is very much ‘Taking things to another level again’. It’ll also keep me surprisingly and gainfully busy alongside the day to day running of the title, I can assure you.

That said, it is currently early days for this third special issue. Indeed Ben and Filippo’s anticipated timescales are such that we’re likely looking towards a 2021 publication date, something which seems a vast time away right now, but doubtless will be upon us all before we know it. I’ll continue to update our readership and contributor community of developments as we move in to 2020.

---

[1] Something painfully obvious I’m sure to anyone who’s met me in the flesh, or listened to one of my (near) countless science fiction podcasts and videos!

[2] I include those scholars I’ve worked with on the other two special issues as well, it’s been a wonderful experience for myself as well as (I hope) for them.

Gareth Johnson : 28 Nov 2019 13:06 |  Tags: Culture Issue Loneliness Nerd Oxford Soas Special |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Building a Better Journal Workshop

A couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of contributing to the Institute of Advanced Study’s (IAS) Accolade researcher development programme once again. Last year, I contributed a session to the programme on Exchanges and related scholar-led publishing topics which lasted around 90 minutes; although this year due to room availability my slot was regretfully cut back to an hour [1]. I’d originally been planning something a bit different for this year, as after reflection on the previous session I concluded that it contained too much ‘chalk and talk’ and insufficient discussion and interaction. Before I heard about the session’s length, and with my own kinaesthetic learning tendencies in mind, I’d outlined a healthy 90 minute workshop deconstructing scholar-led publishing in a series of interlinked exercises. Yes, a healthy dose of gamification was included in the outline too.

Faced with my ‘reduced Shakespeare’ session, I reconfigured the workshop into roughly 20% talk and 80% activities for the research fellows. It was, thankfully, a highly energised session which engendered plenty of questions and group discussion during the guided activities. As with any lectrure, seminar or workshop there were still elements I’d tweak for a future performance, but nevertheless it was a clearly workable format that I’ll be able to reuse elsewhere [2]. Additionally, the input, questions and insights from the fellows were extremely useful in helping to clarify various issues.

Given the appropriately spooky date for the session, I posed a question asking people to talk about and share their publishing horror stories. Every academic has them, and some may even keep people awake at night! I captured a few of them here, and I’m sure it’s a rare scjholar with whom these don’t resonate on some level.

I also ran the prototype of an exercise which challenged attendees to prioritise editorial and process elements to construct for their ‘perfect’ journal. Once again there were some key learning outcomes from this. Firstly, for the timescale I gave people too many options, and a re-run would likely need to introduce a prior winnowing technique or utilise fewer options. I might also need to introduce some clearer rules or criteria for assigning items to each category, although given the point of the exercise was to leave as much decision making in the hands of the delegates, that aspect may remain as it is. For example, here’s one of the six group’s final grids [3] showing one possible configuration using about 20% of the possible options.

Practically, I also learned that if you’re printing paper props off give yourself plenty of time, as I spent my entire lunch break cutting out strips of paper. Obviously, as this was the inaugural run for this session it was difficult to realise how it would work under-fire, but I’m confident with some slight tweaks it’ll produce a series highly stimulating and reflective exercises. I might also enhance the ‘playing pieces’ somewhat to make them clearer. Failing to realise that not everyone speaks fluent editor terminology was a very apposite point of feedback.

So in conclusion: what did I learn? Well, aside from the comments on the efficacy of running the session, I gained some insightful feedback on running a journal like Exchanges, and the perceptions of people within our potential contributor community. I’ll be using this feedback to help shape my planned focus groups, where I want to explore some related issues with groups of post-graduates and early career researchers alike. Naturally, I’ll talk about the results of these here.

---

[1] Rumours of a second slot in term 3 abide, but have yet to be confirmed! I'll worry about that in 2020.

[2] Possibly in my other teaching and workshop commitments over this academic year

[3] Image credit Hsiao Lie, to whom I note my thanks!

Gareth Johnson : 14 Nov 2019 16:01 |  Tags: Accolade Researcher Teaching Training Workshop |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Issue (Volume 7 No. 1) Published

Writing about web page https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1

If you’re a registered reader of Exchanges, or follow our twitter feed, you’ll have already spotted the great news that last week we rolled out the 13^th issue of the journal. For those keeping score, this makes it the 4^th issue under my own august editorship, equalling the previous best run of my predecessor. This issue’s varied table of contents is as follows:

Johnson, G.J., 2019. Effective Contributor Communication and Editorial Process Efficacy: Editorial, Volume 7, Part 1. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.538

Tan, I., 2019. The Artist in and of the Work: Joyce’s Artistic Self-Fashioning. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.400.

Eze, V.C., & Ejiofor, S.O., 2019. Problems of Reading Comprehension In Learning Chinese As A Second Language Among Undergraduates of Chinese Studies in Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.451.

Tho, N.H., et al. 2019. Multi-objective Production Planning for a Flexible Manufacturing System based on NSBBO Method. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.288.

Pisaturo, M., & Senatore, A., 2019. Electric Motor and Dry Clutch Control in Launch Manoeuvres of Mild-Hybrid Vehicles Based on AMT/DCT Transmissions. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.319.

Heyerick, I., 2019., Is there an I in Impact? Considering the two-way process of public engagement. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.520.

Vince, R., & Teichler, Hanna., 2019. Challenging Binaries and Unfencing Fields: An Interview with Bryan Cheyette. https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v7i1.517.

It’s been great once more to bring together such a wide-ranging set of articles and authors; with notably two of our first published authors from Africa. This just leaves South America and Antarctica as the continental regions from which we’ve yet to publish work: if you’re a scholar based in these regions looking for a friendly, early career focussed, quality assured title to publish in, we’d love to hear from you.

Meanwhile, as I go back to deal with all the various promotional and post-publication tasks for Vol 7(1), I’m also scaling work in preparation for our anticipated January publication of the Cannibalism special issue, not to mention dealing with submissions for consideration for future volumes. Naturally though, as an editor, my appetite for manuscripts remains unsated, so hopefully there’ll be plenty more potential submissions coming to us over the last couple of months of this decade. Do get in touch if you’d like to talk through an outline article, or just take the plunge and submit – we look forward to hearing from you!

Gareth Johnson : 05 Nov 2019 09:57 |  Tags: 2019 Contents Issue New Published Special Table |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Refreshing Exchanges' Reviewer Database

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

Today I finally hit the big red button on something I’ve been working on over the summer. This has been a task which has oscillated between being a labour of love, while also posing a seemingly Sisyphean task [1]. Thus, reaching its conclusion has brought a combination of relief and satisfaction but also unsurprisingly generated a bit more work for me before I could call it a day. It involved that most crucial of academic journal contributors: peer-reviewers. As I’ve mentioned before, peer-reviewers aren’t just an essential part of the Exchanges editorial workflow, they’re contributions and insights are deeply valued by the Editorial Team and authors alike.

In short, in my spare working moments I’ve been methodically working though our database of registered peer-reviewers and examining what each and every one of them has listed as their reviewer interests. Registered reviewer interests are crucial as these are what my editors and I search when we’re looking for people to participate in peer review of our submitted papers. The main part of my ‘summer fun’ exercise was to identify those people who’ve registered profiles and expressed a willingness to be potential reviewers for Exchanges, and examine what they say about themselves.

But, and it’s a big but, where registered reviewers haven’t listed any research interests then, well they’re essentially invisible to the editors when seeking potential peer-reviewers. If we don’t know what field you work in, or the areas of expertise you profess, then we’re not going to approach you as a reviewer. A surprising 38.5% of our registered reviewers turned out to have failed to supply this key information on their registered profiles. Hence, today’s figurative ‘button’ dispatched emails to those would-be reviewers identified as deficient in this respect, asking if they’d kindly spend a few moments reviewing their profiles and adding in this information.

This naturally uncovered over 40 dead email addresses, and while I’ve managed to correct a few, sadly I’ve removed the majority from our reviewer register. This won’t stop people re-registering with a new email address, something I’d strongly encourage, but does mean our reviewer database now only contains contacts with valid contact addresses. I’ve also had a number of nice chats with former and would be reviewers as a result, which is an unexpected bonus, as engaging with our readership and continuators alike is always a pleasure.

A further serendipitous part of this exercise was the chance to do some light data cleansing work on the rest of the reviewer profiles. Quite a few of these had reviewer interests somewhat confusingly listed, which means, I suspect, they’d have risked being overlooked by my editors. I’m happy now these registered reviewers will turn up more frequently and accurately when we’re looking for people to contribute to our quality assurance activities.

If you are one of our reviewers, then checking your review interests are up-to-date, accurate and complete is one of the most useful things you can do for our journal. Many of the reviewers who do have information on their interests, have only listed one or two areas, whereas five or more would be far more representative of a ‘good’ record. Updating your reviewer profile only takes a few moments and there are easy instructions on how to go about it [2].

Conversely, if you would like to register as a reviewer with us, then by all means please do consider it. You’ll likely find our peer-reviewer guidance helpful [3]. And if you've never peer-reviewed before - then can I recommend this excellent text to get you started [4].

In the meanwhile, I can now crack on with planning my workshops, meetings and presentations for the autumn term now, with this grand summer task solidly in the rear-view mirror.

---

[1] Foolishly I thought OJS might be able to run off a report for me, with a list of all reviewers lacking any entries in their review field, but it appears the way the database is designed or implemented makes this impossible. Or at least highly impractical for my tech support people. One of the many reasons why much better managerial reporting tools for the platform are right up at the top of my technical wishlist for the platform! The time they could save me is not inconsiderable.

[2] https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/FAQ#reviewers

[3] https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/peerreviewer

[4] http://www.plotina.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Introduction-to-Peer-Review-Guide.pdf #ShamelessSelfPromotion

Gareth Johnson : 09 Oct 2019 15:40 |  Tags: Assurance Cleansing Data Peer Profiles Quality Review Reviewers Updating |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Trackbacks (1) |  Report a problem

Reflections of the Vitae Researcher Development Conference

On Monday (16^th Sept) this week, I had the delightful opportunity of attending and speaking at the Vitae Researcher Development International Conference, hosted at the Hilton Birmingham Metropole Hotel. Leaving home before dawn, and returning home quite late in the evening, it was nevertheless an excellent event. Exchanges has a core mission to support not only the dissemination of early career researcher’s discourse and, in line with the IAS’s mission, also seeks to work with authors in developing their prose and voice. Hence, attending a conference focussing solely on the practice, theory and policy of developing researchers was very much in my interest.

While the conference was broken down into plenaries, breakout sessions and workshops like any conference, it was interesting to witness the recurrent themes that came up, especially during the opening keynotes. Wellbeing was a strongly represented theme, along with that of coping with a changing research environment, both for researchers and those who work alongside them. Perhaps not unsurprisingly, the ‘B-word’ was alluded to on numerous occasions as a particular challenge for the entire HE sector, not to mention the nation as a whole. However, it wasn’t a topic that any of the sessions I attended specifically focussed on, but nevertheless remains the elephant in the room we can’t simply ignore.

These dark clouds aside, after the fairly rousing opening session, we moved on to an excellent lunch before for me the high-spot of the day: my own talk. Those of you who have met me, know there’s on thing I love doing (almost) as much as managing Exchanges, and that’s to talk about various aspects of scholarly communication and publishing to anyone who will listen. At length.

I was speaking as part of a panel session providing case studies of researcher development practice. It was, as a few of the speakers commented, a slightly odd session in that the examples of researcher development ranged from an exemplar collaborative workshop to discussions around a specially configured building housing 6 overlapping departments in Barcelona. Nevertheless, the packed room seemed responsive to the topics discussed. My own contribution was very well received too, as I was bombarded with questions during and after the session. There was quite a positive response on social media too, and I suspect there may be some follow up with a few people as a result. My thanks to the conference organisers for hosting me, and I hope to be back with another paper next year!

After this session there were a couple of ‘half-plenaries’, so called as half the delegates would fit into each of the allocated rooms. I attended the one with the more senior academics speaking, and after some (slightly baffling) discussion on the ‘concordat’ [1], two particularly inspiring talks from Prof Matthew Flinders (Sheffield) and Prof Marcos Munafò (Bristol) followed. Matthew’s enthusiasm in particular was infectious, especially given he launched into his talk before halting after a couple of minutes to realise he’d failed to introduce himself to the audience!

Matthew expounded on the theme of change, but also uncertainty, in that ‘change is endemic’ within researcher careers, but what and how it is changing is not easy to identify or quantify. He also noted how much developmental effort centres on early-career researchers, but given the post-doc period of employment now increasingly stretching to a decade or more, the mental health toll on many emerging scholars is immense. And this is even before they land their first ‘academic’ post. He noted how mid-career researchers and professoriate also need developmental support and mentoring (‘the M word’) in order to cope with both the changes across the academy and within the ‘academic job’ remit. This he stressed was alongside the need for them to be able to offer effective support to their subordinates. He took the opportunity too to criticise the ‘silly culture’ wherein scholars leaving the academy are perceived to have ‘failed’ by their colleagues remaining behind. He argued these people could return to universities and bring an incredible richness of experience with them, and yet systematically they were disenfranchised by the career esteem models the academy has embraced, to the detriment of teaching and research. Matthew concluded by noting how the academy doesn’t sufficiently celebrate, support and manage the exceptional talent they have within research support staff and units; which given the increasingly crucial part they play within the modern research team was disheartening.

Marcos, started on a theme familiar to myself, that scholars are more incentivised (through career esteem structures and metrics) to publish and bring in funding, rather than to produce research which answered genuine problems. He noted, as has been discussed elsewhere, the lack of publication of ‘null results’, due to the low esteem it brings to journals and authors, results in pointless and resource-costly repetition of experimental research which could be avoided. He also drew the insightful simile concerning academia, notably doctoral programmes, and the US 1970s motor industry; where the focus on mass production ignored the many errors requiring remediation. Marcos also highlighted the lack of accountability within the academy, illustrated by failing PhD students. Here, there was little blowback on supervisors when this happened, which was not an equitable state of affairs. Marcos also highlighted how senior academics continue to be recruited for the possessing wrong traits for their roles. People are being picked for being career superstars with strong esteem credentials, rather than being able to demonstrate strong human resource, managerial and project management abilities. This he suggested added to the problems faced by the academy as an employer and in terms of employee wellbeing.

After this excellent session, I attended a workshop on failure and PGRs – Fail Live, delivered by Davina Whitnall and Dr Ursula Hurley at the University of Salford. While fairly discursive, and inaugurated with a guided mediation, I confess of this conference session was the one which inspired me the least. That isn’t to say the topic of embracing and celebrating failure as ‘part of the story of success’ wasn’t an important one to be addressed. However, the workshop felt unwieldly in terms of content and delivery, and I suspect it would have worked better with a smaller and more intimate audience, than to a room of 40+ delegates.

To end on a high, I concluded my day in one of the special interest sessions, in this case concerning academic podcasting. Hosted by Donald Lush (King’s College London) the session made use of the time to do a ‘live’ recording of a joint episode of two podcasts: one aimed at established researchers and the other at doctoral candidates. I’ve long been a producer and contributor to podcasts in a personal capacity, and I confess they’re on my wishlist to develop around Exchanges and our contributor community as an extension to the journal’s brand and discourse contribution. In this respect, myself and the library’s Scholarly Communications team have been having some tentative conversations about this and other media areas, so perhaps watch this space for news of our future collaborations.

As you can tell from these reflections, I was pleasantly surprised to find such an embarrassment of inspiration, insight and engagement at the Vitae conference. It exceeded my expectations in nearly every sense, and I wished I could have somehow transcended time and space to attend many more of the breakout sessions than I was physically able. I also slightly regret only booking for one of the two days, as the second day also clearly included a lot of engaging material. I look forward to catching up with my Warwick library colleague who was in attendance throughout.

Nevertheless, I was delighted by the reception of the work that Exchanges and my editors do, which is something I’ve passed along to them, in partial thanks for all their efforts in helping keep the journal running.

I'll share some notes from my talk, in my next post.

---

[1] That would be The Concordat to Support the Career Development of Researchers, but it wasn’t something I was keenly aware of until after the conference.

Gareth Johnson : 19 Sep 2019 15:26 |  Tags: Conference Development Exchanges Presentations Reflections Speaking |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Relocation Achieved and Open Participation Calls

Well the good news is the relocation to the new offices for Exchanges Headquarters this week has been pretty successful, although there’s the usual niggles. Not to mention getting used to a new location and finding all the important local amenities, along with working out the most logical and effective places to stash my office supplies. There is though a lovely view out of the office, and I’m writing to this entry to the happy sound of birds tweeting directly outside my window. Hence, I suspect this will be a splendid space to conduct the journal’s business.

As next week I’m speaking (Monday) at the Vitae International Researcher Developer conference in Birmingham, I’m tied up today with running through my talk, so apologies for a shorter than usual rumination on developments in scholarly publishing.

In the meanwhile – here’s a reminder of all our currently open calls for participation:

Themed call for papers for a special issue, inspired by the recent Utopia, Dystopia and Climate Change Utopian Studies Society conference. Deadline 30th Nov '19. https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/announcement/view/17

For the Spring 2020 issue, Exchanges particularly welcomes submissions which will contribute to a themed section on in-between spaces. Deadline 1^st Nov ’19 https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/announcement/view/15

Of course Exchanges welcomes manuscript submissions on any research topic which fulfil our manuscript submission format requirements. This is an open call, with no closing date. https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/announcement/view/16

Finally, for early-career or post-graduate researchers at Monash University, we're looking for new recruits to join our editorial board. See details here, or speak to any of our current editors. Deadline 20^th Sept. https://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/exchangesias/entry/call_for_editors/

Gareth Johnson : 12 Sep 2019 09:51 |  Tags: Campus Ias New Office Relocation Zeeman |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Out of Office, and into a New One

It's all change in the Exchanges editorial office this week - or rather, it's all change forthe Exchanges editorial office this week. Myself, along with my colleagues in the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS) are relocating to some lovely new offices closer to the heart of Warwick's campus. And in my case, nearer to the local wild fowl too. I'm writing this message off-site today, having packed up my entire office into three crates which will be moved at the start of the next week to my new office.

This might mean a slight blip in communications, while I get my computer and phone transferred and set up, but hopefully it will be so brief most readers probably won't even notice. Rest assured though, the Exchanges servers will remain fully operational and accessible throughout, so you'll be able to read, submit and interact with the journal as normal.

I'm very excited about the move, as it's introduced some new possibilities for engaging with the local early career community that I'm in the process of developing. Naturally, more about these once I'm ready to announce.

In the meanwhile, don't forget about all our various open calls for contributions and participation - the editorial team are waiting to hear from you!

Gareth Johnson : 05 Sep 2019 09:24 |  Tags: Announcements Communications Move Office Relocation |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Call for Editors: Monash University (Sept 2019)

Once again, Exchanges is delighted to announce that we’re seeking a new member for our Editorial Board, due the departure of some team members. This call is specifically for early career and post-graduate researchers registered with Monash University, Australia [1]. Thanks in part to the ongoing Monash-Warwick Alliance, Exchanges has long enjoyed a wonderful collaboration with members of the Melbourne based university, and it’s something I’m keen to continue.

You can download and read the formal call here [PDF], or alternatively chat to some of the current Monash based Exchanges editors for more details. Naturally, you can always drop myself as Editor-in-Chief a line directly (exchangesjournal@warwick.ac.uk), with any questions you might have.

The short version of the call is:

• Open to early career or current post-graduate researchers based at Monash University
• A 1 to 2 year commitment of time, working remotely
• Role supports the editorial review and copyediting stages of publication
• Editors also have a crucial role in promoting, commissioning and encouraging new article submissions to the journal
• No experience in publishing required, but an enthusiasm for scholar-led publication is essential

Editors have the opportunity to be part of an international editorial board, forge extensive interdisciplinary networks and gain first-hand experience of editorial and publication production workflows. Further details of the role’s responsibilities and expectations are available on request.

If this sounds like you, then read the call and then get your application in quickly, because it closes Friday 20^th September; although we may close if sooner if a suitable candidate is found sooner. I look forward to hearing from you!

[1] A call for editors from Warwick, is likely to appear later this year.

Gareth Johnson : 19 Aug 2019 09:48 |  Tags: Australia Board Editorial Editors Monash Recruitment University |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Call for Papers: Climate Fiction, Friction & Fact

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/announcement/view/17

Following the Utopia, Dystopia and Climate ChangeUtopian Studies Society conference, attended by myself in an editorial capacity, we are delighted to announce a call for contributions to a special issue entitled ‘Climate Fiction, Friction & Fact’. The special issue, which is scheduled for publication in late 2020, explore interdisciplinary issues and perspectives relating, but not limited to, the conference themes (helpfully summarised in the call).

Excitingly, while we hope that many of the early career and PhD researchers attending the conference will consider submitting a manuscript, the call is open to all. So, if you were unable to attend the conference but would still love to write something for us - you can!

You can read the formal call for papers here or download the full details directly. Authors looking to contribute have a deadline of the end of November 2019 to submit a manuscript for consideration for this issue. I'm really looking forward to seeing the variety of submissions for this as it couldn't be a more timely and pressing topic.

Meanwhile, for those of you interested in our other special issue already in progress, I'm pleased to report that most of the manuscripts are either in the middle of peer review or undergoing author revisions at the moment. My thanks to all the authors, reviewers and editors working on these over the summer - your efforts are much appreciated. My especially thank to Giulia and Zac for their advice and support in pulling this call together.

Of course we still have two other open calls for papers for our in-between spaces themedcall, and our general open call for papers. So, even if cli-fi isn't really your thing, but you wanted a great journal to work with to publish - then Exchanges should really be your destination!

Gareth Johnson : 15 Aug 2019 11:58 |  Tags: Call Clifi Climate Fiction Issue Papers Special Submissions |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Summer Submissions & Editorial Changes

August is traditionally a quiet month, physically, around campus. It’s also fairly quiet electronically, as here at Exchanges HQ there’s been a noticeable tailing off of email traffic: beyond the regular out of office messages popping up when we get in touch with various people across the global academy. Unsurprisingly, many scholars are using this month to take a well-earned annual vacation.

Having just returned from a delightful staycation myself though, the quiet is giving me a great opportunity to pick up on and develop some of the developmental threads and projects that I’ve naturally side-lined due to more pressing term time work. It’s a slight peculiarity that despite not working with taught course students, Exchanges remains subject to the ebb and flow of the scholastic year. However, this is more of an artefact of the academics who are writing, reviewing and editing for us being AFK (away from keyboard). Although, I’ve had more than one email response in the past week from scholars nominally on holiday!

One slightly unexpected thing I’m finding myself dealing with as Editor-in-Chief in this quiet time is handling the fallout from a couple of my Editorial Board standing down on fairly short notice. While, understandably due to the rising pressures of their other professional commitments, I’m always sorry to see any of my team leave. Partly, because it means I’ve some shuffling of assignments to handle, but mainly because I know how much the journal has benefitted from their contributions and insight, alongside their editorial labour. However, Exchanges has always seen itself as a journal providing a training and experiential boost to our editors, so I can’t complain when it contributes to their career progression. Fair sailing and every future success, Andrew and Jane!

Of course, many academics take the summer break as the opportunity to catch up on all their writing and publishing plans. If you’re an early career scholar, or PhD student, then maybe take a moment to consider writing something for Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal. We’ve two currently open calls for publication (1) a themed in-between spaces one and (2) our regular open call on any topic or theme. I should mention, if you’re thinking of writing something like a critical reflection or an interview, these are the kinds of articles we can typically publish much faster as they don’t normally undergo peer review. Which means there’s a really good chance you could appear in print in a matter of a few short months in our autumn issue.

Gareth Johnson : 08 Aug 2019 10:15 |  Tags: Calls Editors Papers Projects Submissions Summer |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem