tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post416021394086217129..comments2024-03-25T02:33:41.590-05:00Comments on FemaleScienceProfessor: Review Well or DieFemale Science Professorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15288567883197987690noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-53969657404381753312011-03-05T10:50:18.197-06:002011-03-05T10:50:18.197-06:00I'm newish on the tenure track, and the volume...I'm newish on the tenure track, and the volume of review requests gradually is increasing. In addition to using my publications to identify me as a potential reviewer, I like to think that repeat requests from journals show that editors also rate the quality and timeliness of my reviews highly. Like everyone else I list the journals for which I review on my CV; would it be acceptable/appropriate to put the number of reviews for each journal in parentheses after the journal name? I'm thinking that (for tenure review) I would get the impression that someone is a good reviewer if she/he listed 15 reviewed manuscripts for Journal A versus 2, for example. Thoughts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-56659026832262837942011-02-28T10:46:58.885-06:002011-02-28T10:46:58.885-06:00One way that our institution gives credit for revi...One way that our institution gives credit for reviews is that every faculty member is required to file an annual report with the dean of the school, detailing teaching loads and summarizing evaluations, listing publications and presentations, and detailing service to the department, the community, and the greater academic community. Peer reviewing goes into that last category. Those with exceptional academic service are eligible for reduced departmental service assignments, including committee sabbaticals. Those with insubstantial academic community service are assigned to more onerous institutional service roles. And, in theory, if we ever get pay increases again, good academic community service counts towards merit pay increases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-18700529738117949612011-02-26T12:49:05.347-06:002011-02-26T12:49:05.347-06:00Postdocs can definitely review, and there are a fe...Postdocs can definitely review, and there are a few things you can do to signal your interest in doing some reviews. <br /><br />You can talk to faculty you know, and perhaps they will pass your name along to editors. For example, when we decline a review request, some journals ask us to suggest alternatives, so if your faculty colleagues knew you were interested, they could start listing you. <br /><br />You could also introduce yourself to editors at conferences, talk about their journal, and mention that you're interested in getting some reviewer experience. A postdoc did just that with me at a conference a couple of years ago, and I remembered it when seeking a review for a manuscript relevant to his research interests.<br /><br />If you know any editors personally, you could also contact them and let them know you're interested in reviewing. <br /><br />Even without being proactive, you may start getting requests anyway. When editors search for reviewers, some search the recent literature or use search functions in the manuscript-handling system that suggests reviewers based on keywords in the literature. If you've been publishing, your name will turn up.Female Science Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15288567883197987690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-24430309174914674492011-02-26T06:27:39.470-06:002011-02-26T06:27:39.470-06:00I know this isn't quite related to the topic o...I know this isn't quite related to the topic of the thread, but I just had a quick questions. How does one go about becoming a reviewer? I have recently received my PhD and have had the opportunity to do quite a bit of publishing thus far. However, it's not clear to me how one makes oneself available to do reviews. Does one simply have to wait until obtaining a tenure track position? Are postdocs typically given the opportunity to review? If so, is there a way to seek this out? Just curios.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-70303039364029309682011-02-24T17:41:51.717-06:002011-02-24T17:41:51.717-06:00There are too many variables that make punishing s...There are too many variables that make punishing scientists for weak peer reviews a very slippery road. Unless there’s a way to determine whether bad reviews are done because of the wrong reasons e.g.: laziness, desire to exploit the situation, plain incompetence, punishments form a very slippery road.<br /><br />I think the only other time review proficiency should be considered in a tenure promotion is when you have several suitable candidates and they all “score” pretty much the same in all the other areas of scientific proficiency. In practice, it’s not very easy to determine that. <br /><br />If you don’t mind me sharing my idea (in a nutshell): I envision a new type of centralized peer review model, with standardized peer review criteria/tools and standardized criteria/tools to rate peer reviews by their fellow peer reviewers of the same peer review sessions. We could then quantify this systematically gained assessment of their peer review proficiency i.e. an impact metric for peer reviewing if you will. Using that impact metric, we can create rankings for peer reviewers and specialized “priority conditions” that allow their manuscripts to be more visible (for peer review). So the better you peer review, the better your odds of your own manuscripts being visible, read and peer reviewed themselves.<br /><br />Technically and functionally very feasible with OA preprint repositories (complimented with special platforms for people to interact and collaborate on) and if it’s open peer review. There are a number of options to provide anonymity too for reviewers, but those are a lot more challenging to accomplish technically/functionally.Wobblerhttp://thewobblingmind.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-84096144576816723432011-02-24T14:58:17.897-06:002011-02-24T14:58:17.897-06:00Do you think that being a member of the editorial ...Do you think that being a member of the editorial board of a journal gets credit at a tenure or promotion review? One way to get there is to do good reviews and get this recognition for it.mOOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440274434662150925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-68662776127176381952011-02-24T14:09:34.232-06:002011-02-24T14:09:34.232-06:00I agree with Mark P and the post; go for the intri...I agree with Mark P and the post; go for the intrinsic rewards of being a good citizen (in this case reviewer) and try to instill in early career colleagues the importance of being a conscientious reviewer. This should be a part of mentoring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-33086046739333611532011-02-24T13:27:49.227-06:002011-02-24T13:27:49.227-06:00Dear Female Science Professor:
Thanks for your o...Dear Female Science Professor: <br /><br />Thanks for your ongoing contributions to the higher education blogosphere. <br /><br />Thought I'd comment to let you know that you were featured today on Dr. William G. Tierney's blog (co-authored with members of his research center). Here's the link at "21st Century Scholar:" http://21stcenturyscholar.org/2011/02/24/thursday-is-techday-two-blogs-for-the-price-of-one/edu / punkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07841211128699735871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-56519480174293530712011-02-24T11:09:29.212-06:002011-02-24T11:09:29.212-06:00First, reviewing for top jounrals in the field is ...First, reviewing for top jounrals in the field is viewed as a sign you are recognized as an important player in your area. I would certainly view it as a plus in a tenure decision.<br /><br />Second, how in heavens name can I tell who is a "good" or 'lousy" reviewer when reviewing someone for promotion, unless I was the editor on the papers they reviewed. I do thank the gods for good reviewers, and avoid serial lousy ones, but no one will have access to how well a person does at the task.<br /><br />Finally, being a good scientific citizen has its own intrinsic rewards, some of which are even tangible--keeping up with the latest in your field, and being viewed favorably by leading colleagues. <br /><br />Mark PAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-88573495981320552392011-02-24T10:00:53.234-06:002011-02-24T10:00:53.234-06:00I couldn't disagree more. It depends on how b...I couldn't disagree more. It depends on how bad "bad" is. The scientific enterprise depends critically on everyone contributing to the review of colleagues' and competitors' papers in a fair and timely way. Unfair and late reviews go from annoying behavior to unethical behavior with the degree of unfairness and lateness. Extremely unfair and never returned reviews, I think, crosses into misconduct. It is taking unfair advantage of others for your own gain (since presumably you are continuing to work on the research that is important to you, perhaps even submitting your own papers for review!) Unethical behavior and misconduct should always be considered in criteria for tenure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-77008848327199243122011-02-24T09:56:48.917-06:002011-02-24T09:56:48.917-06:00I don't think the system is broken, although t...I don't think the system is broken, although there is always room for improvement of course. There are always going to be diligent people and lazy people, in reviewing as in everything else. Creating a system of punishment to try to get better, more punctual reviewing out of more people is not the way to go because that is not a way to motivate thoughtful, constructive reviews. So maybe the rewards should be greater for excellent, punctual reviews? Some journals do recognize excellent reviewers, but, although most editors make objective decisions about this, I know one who selected all his best friends for the 'award'. No system is going to be perfect. I think we have to find satisfaction in our own hard work and not worry about the slackers (until one of our own papers is a victim of a shoddy review).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-4688488820114739602011-02-24T09:04:55.053-06:002011-02-24T09:04:55.053-06:00Well, this explains all the crappy reviews I keep ...Well, this explains all the crappy reviews I keep getting (as an author and as a subject editor). <br /><br />If people think reviewing counts for nothing, then many will not participate or do it poorly. I truly believe the system is broken because of this reality. Question: How can we fix it? <br /><br />(There are people out there who are responsible and vested, who do constructive and intelligent, on-time reviewing. These folks are completely swamped with review requests, in my experience. How can we increase this pool?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-19943017584783747422011-02-24T03:37:54.019-06:002011-02-24T03:37:54.019-06:00I agree that bad reviewers shouldn't be heavil...I agree that bad reviewers shouldn't be heavily penalised but I wish there was a way to get credit for being a good reviewer. I think I'm a pretty good reviewer - I accept 90% of the reviews I'm asked to do and get them back on time (or sometimes 2 days late). But there is no way to indicate that on my cv.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com