The editors of this project, Bryan McAllister-Grande and Rebecca Hovey (with support of the NAFSA TLS Research & Scholarship Subcommittee), are now planning for their third installment, targeted for January/February 2012. This installment will be thematic: the theme is "Sustainable Global Commitments in International Education." For this theme, we are especially seeking creative, longer review articles that analyze a particular issue, drawing upon several different recent books and the reviewer's professional expertise. This theme is meant to build off of the attention that "sustainability" is receiving at several different levels (including the upcoming NAFSA conference), and different intellectual and practical aspects of sustainability's relationship to international education.
The web site is at www.nafsa.org/gslreview where you can download the "Call for Reviewers" and read prior installments.
The NAFSA Teaching, Learning and Scholarship (TLS) knowledge community has just launched their new and exciting pilot project entitled “Review of Global Studies Literature” and I thought IHEC Blog readers would be interested in checking out. Under the leadership of Rebecca Hovey and Bryan McAllister-Grande (co-editors), this e-compilation of book reviews features 12 different international educators analyzing sixteen recent books related to our field. The Review encompasses not only traditional international education literature, but also literature from converging fields: comparative education, global studies, human rights, and academic textbooks. The Review can be found at: www.nafsa.org/GSLreview
Since this is new project, the editors welcome any and all feedback. They are also looking for contributors for upcoming additions to the compilation, and a call for reviewers will be announced in the next few weeks.
Please contact the editors using the email addresses below with your feedback
Rebecca Hovey
Rebecca.Hovey@sit.edu
Bryan McAllister-Grande
bgrande@brandeis.edu
There are some really great things happening over at the NAFSA Research/Scholarship Network (part of the larger Teaching, Learning & Scholarship Knowledge Community). The following post is simply a copy & past job from a recent Research/Scholarship Network call for authors. Many thanks to Rebecca Hovey for leading this effort and to Bryan McAllister-Grand for his work on this!
Members of the NAFSA Research/Scholarship Network (www.nafsa.org/rsnetwork) are working on a new pilot resource for the field, tentatively called "Reviews of Global Studies Literature." This online feature will consist of short reviews & synopses of recent research and literature.
The purpose of the project title is to include not only international education research and literature, but also relevant books for our profession in fields such as human rights, peace and justice, international relations, international studies, cross-cultural communication, psychology, anthropology, etc. A more complete description of the project with submission guidelines is available at http://www.brandeis.edu/globalbrandeis/office/RSReviewsOct2009.pdf or can be requested by email (see below).
We are writing today to invite you to be involved as a book review author for two initial "issues" in 2010. These reviews will be published online to the NAFSA Research/Scholarship Network, promoted in our
discussion forums, and in PDF form for download.
Book reviews will be of two types, although we would consider other creative proposals:
1. Book review *articles* will compare and review 3-5 related books in a short essay format of less than 1,000 words. The articles should take on one topic or regional area (e.g. "social justice," "global competence," or "Africa") and integrate book reviews with the author's knowledge/expertise of that topic. The article should also address the relevance of the books to the field of International Education.
2. Book *synopses* will be short reviews of individual books of approximately 1-2 paragraphs or less than 500 words.
Deadlines:
# January 15th 2010 submission deadline for mid-February 1st online Issue
# April 18th 2010 submission deadline for May NAFSA Conference online Issue
More information:
A project description with more details on submission guidelines, as well as a list of potential books to review, is available at http://www.brandeis.edu/globalbrandeis/office/RSReviewsOct2009.pdf
We hope you'll also consider suggesting other books for review so we can add to our list.
Please note that we can not provide copies of books, nor reimburse for purchasing expenses.
We hope you'll participate in this exciting project, which we hope grows into a kind of virtual "book club." Since the idea is still in development, we'd also welcome feedback about project design, book
choices, etc. Feel free to email either Rebecca or Bryan – contact details below.
Best,
Rebecca Hovey
World Learning
Rebecca.Hovey@sit.edu
Bryan McAllister-Grande
Brandeis University
bgrande@brandeis.edu
Members, NAFSA Sub-Committee on Research/Scholarship
Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship (TLS) Knowledge Community
I found a recent article in Science and Engineering Ethics on the ethics of peer reviewers to be very interesting and thought some readers might also find it to be interesting. I have included a citation for the article as well as the abstract below:Resnik, D., Gutierrez-Ford, & Peddada, S. (2008). Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study. Science and Engineering Ethics, (14)3, 305-310.Abstract: This article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include unnecessary references to his/her publication(s), 17.7% (SE = 2.6%) said that comments from reviewers had included
personal attacks, and 9.6% (SE = 2.0%) stated that reviewers had delayed publication to publish a paper on the same topic. Two of the most serious violations of peer review ethics, breach of confidentiality (6.8%, SE = 1.7%) and using ideas, data, or methods without permission (5%, SE = 1.5%) were perceived less often than the other problems. We recommend that other investigators follow up on our exploratory research with additional studies on the ethics of peer review. (Springer Link)
