Why are refereed publications important

Physical Educator , 44 , — Dennis, L. Peabody Journal of Education , 58 , — Fox, D. The pressure to publish: A graduate student's personal plea. Teaching in Psychology , 10 , — Goldsborough, H.

Canadian Education Association handbook. Huth, E. How to write and publish papers in the medical sciences.

Jalongo, M. Writing for professional publication in early childhood education. Young Children , 41 , 19— Kohl, D. Ratings of journals by ARL library directors and deans of library and information science schools. Marsh, H. Students' evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research.

International Journal of Educational Research , 11 , — Marshall, V. The review process. Canadian Journal on Aging , 5 , 67— Means, R. Research and publication: Faculty survival suggestions. Journal of Teacher Education , 30 , 37— Michaelson, H. How to write and publish engineering papers and reports.

Tutorials Peer Reviewed Literature. After you run your search in these databases find the limits page and apply the peer review limit so that you will only see content published in peer reviewed sources when you begin browsing your retrieval. Remember that not all databases provide the option to limit retrieval to peer reviewed sources. For example, in MEDLINE and Embase you must determine if the journal where your article is published is peer reviewed by using one of the methods described elsewhere in this guide.

Evaluation Methods in Education: Refereed Journals. Refereed Journals A refereed journal, or peer reviewed journal, is a specific type of publication that meets the high standards and rigor expected with academic publishing.

The Anatomy of a Scholarly Source Most refereed articles contain the following sections. Title Abstract Introduction or literature review Purpose of the study or problem statement Methodology, procedures, or research design Major findings, results, analysis, or discussion Summary, conclusion, implications, or ideas for future studies Works cited or references Notes Appendices Tables, charts, figures, and statistical data throughout the article.

Peer Review in 3 Minutes. Qualities of a Scholarly Source Most refereed articles can be identified by the qualities you note throughout the writing.

Here are a few to look for: Audience : The target audience is other researchers, colleagues, and specialists in the field. The evaluation of an academic paper is also affected by the reviewer's scientific beliefs and by the care and effort they choose to invest in the process. Peer review has recently come in for major criticism following cases where reviewers failed to spot serious errors in the author's methodology.

The reasons for 'failures' in the peer review process include peer reviewers' heavy workloads as more papers are published and poor selection of reviewers by editorial boards. Another objection that is frequently raised is that peer review is not transparent enough, not just because the reviews are inevitably subjective especially if reviewers are unable to separate themselves adequately from their particular schools of thought , but also because reviewers may not appreciate the value of a new idea or may withhold — or simply not be asked to provide — relevant information on conflicts of interest.

Another key criticism of peer review is that the process may stretch over a long period of time, generally weeks or months, but occasionally even years.

Some people also suspect that journals which claim to have implemented peer review actually carry out very superficial assessments, or none at all. It is generally accepted that peer review cannot completely eliminate cases of fraud and the publication of low-quality papers. Nevertheless, peer review continues to be favoured despite all the criticism because it has ultimately proved its worth and shown that in most cases it can help improve the quality of publications — especially if authors are able to view the report and work through the comments.

In the end, of course, responsibility lies with the authors who are required to demonstrate rigour, probity and scientific reproducibility as part of the scientific process.

The peer review concept is also constantly being adapted to counter criticism such as the points mentioned above. This criticism has led to the discussion of new alternatives such as open peer review, a concept which includes crowd sourced peer review. In this case articles are published either immediately or after perfunctory preliminary checks and the actual assessment and evaluation process is left to the scientific community.

Although this offers key benefits such as opening up a broader discussion and considerably speeding up the process of publishing comments and assessments, there are also some significant challenges involved in this approach. The main problem is finding a sufficient number of experts who are capable of offering a professional assessment.

It can also be difficult to know how to best organise the platforms used for this purpose to ensure they are manageable and searchable. The current assumption is that open peer review can only work as a supplement to the existing peer review process rather than replacing it altogether. Open peer review also has a number of different variants. Issues that have prompted particular discussion include doubts about the extent to which people should be able to make reviews and comments anonymously, since there is obviously a risk that the process could be muddied by personal feelings and rivalries between individual scientists.

Important note: The information and links provided here do not represent any form of binding legal advice. They are solely intended to provide an initial basis to help get you on the right track.