An official website of the United States government
This is the first of a series of studies that explore the relationship between disciplinary background and the weighting of various elements of a manuscript in peer reviewers’ determination of publication recommendations. Research questions include: (1) To what extent are tacit criteria for determining quality or value of EER manuscripts influenced by reviewers’ varied disciplinary backgrounds and levels of expertise? and (2) To what extent does mentored peer review professional development influence reviewers’ EER manuscript evaluations? Data were collected from 27 mentors and mentees in a peer review professional development program. Participants reviewed the same two manuscripts, using a form to identify strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations. Responses were coded by two researchers (70% IRR). Our findings suggest that disciplinary background influences reviewers’ evaluation of EER manuscripts. We also found evidence that professional development can improve reviewers’ understanding of EER disciplinary conventions. Deeper understanding of the epistemological basis for manuscript reviews may reveal ways to strengthen professional preparation in engineering education as well as other disciplines.
more »
« less
Manuscript Authors’ Perspectives on the Peer Review Process of the Journal of Engineering Education
Research communities often emphasize theoretical frameworks, methodologies, and topics that appeal to particular subgroups of scholars within the community. Therefore, one of the challenges associated with the peer review process is ensuring that innovative ideas are not rejected simply because they live outside the conventional paradigms of the community. Determining why manuscripts are rejected from premier outlets, which influence the norms of a field, can further our understanding of existing disciplinary boundaries and how to increase the diversity of perspectives and the participation of scholars with views outside the conventional paradigm in the community. However, much of the literature on disciplinary boundaries focuses on the reliability of reviewers themselves and published manuscripts. As such, this paper focuses on the experiences and perspectives of scholars who have submitted to but not published an article in the Journal of Engineering Education through in-depth, qualitative interviews.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1929728
- PAR ID:
- 10221717
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Research in Engineering Education Symposium
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 311-318
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This is the first of a series of studies that explore the relationship between disciplinary background and the weighting of various elements of a manuscript in peer reviewers’ determination of publication recommendations. Research questions include: (1) To what extent are tacit criteria for determining quality or value of EER manuscripts influenced by reviewers’ varied disciplinary backgrounds and levels of expertise? and (2) To what extent does mentored peer review professional development influence reviewers’ EER manuscript evaluations? Data were collected from 27 mentors and mentees in a peer review professional development program. Participants reviewed the same two manuscripts, using a form to identify strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations. Responses were coded by two researchers (70% IRR). Our findings suggest that disciplinary background influences reviewers’ evaluation of EER manuscripts. We also found evidence that professional development can improve reviewers’ understanding of EER disciplinary conventions. Deeper understanding of the epistemological basis for manuscript reviews may reveal ways to strengthen professional preparation in engineering education as well as other disciplines.more » « less
-
Members of the anaerobic gut fungi ( Neocallimastigomycota ) reside in the rumen and alimentary tract of larger mammalian and some reptilian, marsupial and avian herbivores. The recent decade has witnessed a significant expansion in the number of described Neocallimastigomycota genera and species. However, the difficulties associated with the isolation and maintenance of Neocallimastigomycota strains has greatly complicated comparative studies to resolve inter- and intra-genus relationships. Here, we provide an updated outline of Neocallimastigomycota taxonomy. We critically evaluate various morphological, microscopic and phylogenetic traits previously and currently utilized in Neocallimastigomycota taxonomy, and provide an updated key for quick characterization of all genera. We then synthesize data from taxa description manuscripts, prior comparative efforts and molecular sequence data to present an updated list of Neocallimastigomycota genera and species, with an emphasis on resolving relationships and identifying synonymy between recent and historic strains. We supplement data from published manuscripts with information and illustrations from strains in the authors’ collections. Twenty genera and 36 species are recognized, but the status of 10 species in the genera Caecomyces, Piromyces , Anaeromyces and Cyllamyces remains uncertain due to the unavailability of culture and conferre ( cf .) strains, lack of sequence data, and/or inadequacy of available microscopic and phenotypic data. Six cases of synonymy are identified in the genera Neocallimastix and Caecomyces , and two names in the genus Piromyces are rejected based on apparent misclassification.more » « less
-
There has been a recent push for greater collaboration across the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in discipline-based education research (DBER). The DBER fields are unique in that they require a deep understanding of both disciplinary content and educational research. DBER scholars are generally trained and hold professional positions in discipline-specific departments. The professional societies with which DBER scholars are most closely aligned are also often discipline specific. This frequently results in DBER researchers working in silos. At the same time, there are many cross-cutting issues across DBER research in higher education, and DBER researchers across disciplines can benefit greatly from cross-disciplinary collaborations. This report describes the Breaking Down Silos working meeting, which was a short, focused meeting intentionally designed to foster such collaborations. The focus of Breaking Down Silos was institutional transformation in STEM education, but we describe the ways the overall meeting design and structure could be a useful model for fostering cross-disciplinary collaborations around other research priorities of the DBER community. We describe our approach to meeting recruitment, premeeting work, and inclusive meeting design. We also highlight early outcomes from our perspective and the perspectives of the meeting participants.more » « less
-
de Vries, E. (Ed.)Modeling is generally recognized as the core disciplinary practice of science. Through examinations of rich learning environments which expand the boundaries of modeling and the practices connected to it, researchers are broadening what modeling means in disciplinary settings. This interactive session brings together a diverse spectrum of scholars to share the practices they have used to expand modeling, how they were used in their curriculum, and the impact they had on learning. This session will serve as a rich opportunity for discussion to help advance the state of the field around what counts as modeling and the role it can play in learning.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
