The primary purpose of publishing, even scholarly publishing, is communication. If you centre the communicative role of publishing, with a focus on the audience and the difference you would like your work to make for that audience, decisions about when and where to publish will change. This … [Read more...] about Communication vs Validation: why are you publishing?
You want to do good work. You want your work to be published so that other scholars can read it and engage with it. You’ve submitted an article manuscript to a peer reviewed journal or a book manuscript to a scholarly monograph publisher. You’ve received a decision and the reviewers comments. … [Read more...] about How can reviewer comments improve your work?
In situations where scarce resources are being allocated, peer review ensures that those decisions are made by people who share a set of values about what counts as knowledge, rigour, and so on. In the context of journal and monograph publishing, only so many things can be published in this … [Read more...] about The role of peer review
This is the 2nd post in a series on how your scholarship is evaluated in various academic evaluation processes. I was inspired by the comments on a blog post on Melville and the knowledge that some of my readers do blog and worry about how this will affect their careers. The first post is … [Read more...] about Peer reviewed journal articles and monographs in the academic evaluation process
Prompted by a post by Justin Bengry on History Compass ... (You can go read it. I'll wait. ...) When should you publish your first monograph? For people in disciplines that value books (as opposed to those that mainly or exclusively publish journal articles), this question has become somewhat … [Read more...] about On advice about publishing before securing an academic job