Peering at the peer review process for conference submissions

Gardner, A; Willey, K; Jolly, L; Tibbits, G

Peering at the peer review process for conference submissions

Gardner, A

Willey, K

Jolly, L Tibbits, G

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2012
Issue Date:: 2012-12-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2012000696OK.pdf	Published version	1.68 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Gardner, A https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2764-591X	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Willey, K https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1478-0346	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Jolly, L	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Tibbits, G	en_US
dc.date.issued	2012-12-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, 2012	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9781467313513	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1539-4565	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/31590
dc.description.abstract	For many scholars conference papers are a stepping stone to submitting a journal article. However with increasing time pressures for presentation at conferences, peer review may in practice be the only developmental opportunity from conference attendance. Hence it could be argued that the most important opportunity to acquire the standards and norms of the discipline and develop researchers' judgement is the peer review process - but this depends on the quality of the reviews. In this paper we report the findings of an ongoing study into the peer review process of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE) annual conference. We began by examining the effectiveness of reviews of papers submitted to the 2010 conference in helping authors to improve and/or address issues in their research. Authors were also given the chance to rate their reviews and we subsequently analysed both the nature of the reviews and authors' responses. Findings suggest that the opportunity to use the peer review process to induct people into the field and improve research methods and practice was being missed with almost half of the reviews being rated as 'ineffectual'. Authors at the 2011 AAEE conference confirmed the findings from the 2010 data. The results demonstrate the lack of a shared understanding in our community of what constitutes quality research. In this paper in addition to the results of the above-mentioned studies we report the framework being adopted by the AAEE community to develop criteria to be applied at future conferences and describe the reviewer activity aimed at increasing understanding of standards and developing judgement to improve research quality within our engineering education community. © 2012 IEEE.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1109/FIE.2012.6462393	en_US
dc.title	Peering at the peer review process for conference submissions	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.for	0915 Interdisciplinary Engineering	en_US
dc.location.activity	Seattle, Washington, USA
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CRIN - Realtime Information Networks
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

For many scholars conference papers are a stepping stone to submitting a journal article. However with increasing time pressures for presentation at conferences, peer review may in practice be the only developmental opportunity from conference attendance. Hence it could be argued that the most important opportunity to acquire the standards and norms of the discipline and develop researchers' judgement is the peer review process - but this depends on the quality of the reviews. In this paper we report the findings of an ongoing study into the peer review process of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AAEE) annual conference. We began by examining the effectiveness of reviews of papers submitted to the 2010 conference in helping authors to improve and/or address issues in their research. Authors were also given the chance to rate their reviews and we subsequently analysed both the nature of the reviews and authors' responses. Findings suggest that the opportunity to use the peer review process to induct people into the field and improve research methods and practice was being missed with almost half of the reviews being rated as 'ineffectual'. Authors at the 2011 AAEE conference confirmed the findings from the 2010 data. The results demonstrate the lack of a shared understanding in our community of what constitutes quality research. In this paper in addition to the results of the above-mentioned studies we report the framework being adopted by the AAEE community to develop criteria to be applied at future conferences and describe the reviewer activity aimed at increasing understanding of standards and developing judgement to improve research quality within our engineering education community. © 2012 IEEE.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/31590