This is the third and final part of my conversation with Brett Bonfield. In the first part, You actually get to talk in real time…, we discussed the personal relationships between editors, authors, and reviewers. In the second part, I think that the structure helped us achieve our aims, Brett reflected more on these personalContinue reading “It’s just built on trust”
Category Archives: Story
I think that the structure helped to achieve our aims
This is the second of three parts to Brett’s story. The first part, You actually get to talk in real time…I think better things come of that, discusses his approach and thoughts about open peer review and relationships with our reviewers. In this second part of Brett’s story, we continue to unpack this relationship theme,Continue reading “I think that the structure helped to achieve our aims”
You actually get to talk in real time…I think better things come of that
This is the first of three posts telling Brett Bonfield’s story. Because Brett is a personal friend, our conversation is more nuanced and discusses our work together as authors and editors. We talked in August of 2020. It was hot in Portland, and since I had not gone to ALA Annual the previous year andContinue reading “You actually get to talk in real time…I think better things come of that”
It’s kind of like having a mentor or a supervisor
This post is the third and final in a series telling Debbie’s story. The first part, Clear about process, discusses two of Debbie’s recent experiences submitting journal articles. The second part, It has to be about the material, delves further in depth into Debbie’s thoughts about why we peer review. In this third and finalContinue reading “It’s kind of like having a mentor or a supervisor”
It has to be about the material and whether it’s furthering the conversation
This is the second in a series of three presenting Debbie’s story. In the first part, Debbie shared her experiences submitting to a Canadian journal and one international in scope. Both of her experiences were positive, and she felt that the communication and transparency of the journal systems were a part of that. In thisContinue reading “It has to be about the material and whether it’s furthering the conversation”
Clear about process. I think that’s the most important thing.
This is the first in a series of Debbie Schachter’s story. At the time of this interview, in August 2020, Debbie was the University Librarian at a small teaching university in North Vancouver, BC. Debbie has had a wide range of experience in libraries and beyond, including in the news media and social services. HerContinue reading “Clear about process. I think that’s the most important thing.”
…but it’s this false community conversation then…
This is the third in a series of three posts that comprise Hannah Gascho Rempel’s story. In her first story part, When you look at a body of literature…, Hannah discussed her recent ties to scholarly publishing, investigating its history, as well as her experiences as a journal editor. In her second story part, TheContinue reading “…but it’s this false community conversation then…”
The system was meant for me
This post is the second in a series of three comprising Hannah Gascho Rempel’s story. The first post, When you look at a body of literature…, discussed some of Hannah’s current involvement and curiosities about scholarly publishing, stemming from the history of scholarly publishing, to her experiences as an editor. In this second story part,Continue reading “The system was meant for me”
When you look at a body of literature as scholarly literature for the past hundred years it becomes really interesting
This is the first of three parts of a conversation with with Hannah Gascho Rempel, Professor and Science Librarian at Oregon State University Libraries. Hannah came to librarianship as a second career, and has been a librarian for about 15 years. Her first was in the plant sciences, in horticulture. Her training in science affordedContinue reading “When you look at a body of literature as scholarly literature for the past hundred years it becomes really interesting”
Quality Check or Mentorship?
Today’s post is the third of three in a series from Laura Saunders, a professor of Library and Information Science at Simmons University. The first part of her story, Just trying to get them to think about the nitty gritty of the process, unpacked her approach to teaching peer review in the classroom. In theContinue reading “Quality Check or Mentorship?”
Stories of Open 