Overall I had a good experience. The journal criteria were clearly
described; the online format made it easy to submit and the reviewer's
comments were helpful. The delay is mine.
Specifically:
a. No
b. Perhaps they decide to go elsewhere, in my case just swamped and
focusing on other articles, do plan to resubmit
c. I don't think so, usually you tailor the work somewhat to meet a
particular journals requirements
d) Yes, but since creativity and innovations are sought, examples might
be seen as prescriptions, also I look for examples in an issue or two to
see if the article I had planned to submit seems like a good fit
e) yes, that would be good
f) I think they are clear
g) that would be helpful as would special calls
h) some journals work with authors to get their work submitted rather
than a accept (with or without revisions) reject

gautamb@... wrote:
>
> Overall, I had a VERY good experience. The delay in publishing was due to
> my own delays in making the appropriate revisions. Other than that, the
> reviews were useful and good suggestions to improve the manuscript were
> made. Here are my answers to the specific questions:
>
> a. No.
> b. N/A
> c. Not in my case.
> d. Yes, or a few articles.
> e. I think that would be helpful
> f. I thought they were clear to start with.
> g. Yes, that could help bolster specific submissions.
> h. That could be more difficult in that one would almost have to have a
> topic in mind before approaching someone.
>
> Hope this is even remotely useful.
>
> > ## PLEASE REPLY TO THE WHOLE GROUP ##
> >
> > Dear Research_Practice Members,
> >
> > The JRP Peer Review Process continues to be worth discussing.
> >
> > H i g h l i g h t s
> >
> > Issues/Questions arising from this discussion:
> >
> > (a) Is the Web-based journal technology alienating?
> > (b) Why are some authors not submitting revisions? (I think, we have had
> > 2-3
> > cases of this.)
> > (c) Are authors submitting to JRP to get feedback to publish elsewhere?
> > (d) Could we have an article on what makes a good JRP article?
> > (e) Could we have a typology of articles published in JRP?
> > (f) Could we restate the scope and objectives of the journal more
> clearly?
> > (g) Could we give a list of areas on which we are looking for
> > contributions?
> > (h) Could we mentor aspiring authors?
> >
> > . . .
>
> Gautam Bhattacharyya
> Department of Chemistry
> Clemson University
> Clemson, SC 29678
> Phone: 864-656-1356
> FAX: 864-656-6613
>
>

## PLEASE REPLY TO THE WHOLE GROUP ##

Speaking of my experience of providing peer reviews here, at JRP, over
the past 18 months or so, and my engagement with postgraduate studies
over the past few years, I have the following responses:

1. 30/70 % Figure:
Most of the papers I have reviewed (11 so far, with 2 revisions)
appear to be contributions from folk in the process of undertaking
postgraduate research to obtain a postgraduate qualification, and/or
who have found themselves working in a area of research new to them,
and have been 'surprised' by the challenges the process of research
has thrown up to them.

At the two universities where I have had most recent contacts,
postgraduate degree supervisors and support services staff encourage
students to work with their writing, and to try and get published.

It seems to me, then, that JRP is attracting some of this level of
writing and submitting for publication consideration, and that 30/70
rejection may be appropriate.

My interests in reviewing, in such a context, are: does my work, in
reviewing, help the writer work some more with their material, and
have some benefit from my inputs?

2. "Journal of Research Practice":

My understanding of the purpose of something like a "Journal of
Research Practice" is that it is focused on the practice of research.
  To write for such a journal involves some element of "research of
research" - what I and others call a "second-order" process.  Such
second-order processes often run the risk of confusion: unless we are
very conscious of the problem, we do not have/use different language
for it; and we lose sight of the process when we are needing to write
about it in the context of research of other "content".

It is often usual, and appropriate, to find discipline specific
methodology discussions dealt with in the discipline specific journals.

Something like JRP brings such discussion to a different forum, and
perhaps for a different purpose: to consider what we can learn about
improving the practice of research from examining the practice of
research in a multitude of fields.

3. Bringing these two points together:

I would expect that student writing about 'research practice' - while
important, and pertinent to the student - is probably premature for
the student to seek to have published, and of limited value to the
field.

However, one of the things I try to keep in mind is what the more
experienced can learn from engaging openly and appreciatively with a
novice - their descriptions of grappling with the learning of the
process can challenge and so provide re-freshed insights to the
experienced practitioner.

I wonder how we, as peer reviewers, can be of most help to such new
explorers, while also considering what it is we are learning about the
process of research, and writing about research, from the novice's
reporting of their experience, and their struggles with writing such a
report.

Dianne Allen
KIAMA, AUSTRALIA



--- In Research_Practice@yahoogroups.com, "D. P. Dash" <dpdash@...> wrote:
>
> ## PLEASE REPLY TO THE WHOLE GROUP ##
>
> Dear Research_Practice Members,
>
> The JRP Peer Review Process continues to be worth discussing.
>
> H i g h l i g h t s
>
> Issues/Questions arising from this discussion:
>
> (a) Is the Web-based journal technology alienating?
> (b) Why are some authors not submitting revisions? (I think, we have
had 2-3
> cases of this.)
> (c) Are authors submitting to JRP to get feedback to publish elsewhere?
> (d) Could we have an article on what makes a good JRP article?
> (e) Could we have a typology of articles published in JRP?
> (f) Could we restate the scope and objectives of the journal more
clearly?
> (g) Could we give a list of areas on which we are looking for
contributions?
> (h) Could we mentor aspiring authors?

Overall, I had a VERY good experience. The delay in publishing was due to
my own delays in making the appropriate revisions. Other than that, the
reviews were useful and good suggestions to improve the manuscript were
made. Here are my answers to the specific questions:

a. No.
b. N/A
c. Not in my case.
d. Yes, or a few articles.
e. I think that would be helpful
f. I thought they were clear to start with.
g. Yes, that could help bolster specific submissions.
h. That could be more difficult in that one would almost have to have a
topic in mind before approaching someone.

Hope this is even remotely useful.


> ## PLEASE REPLY TO THE WHOLE GROUP ##
>
> Dear Research_Practice Members,
>
> The JRP Peer Review Process continues to be worth discussing.
>
> H i g h l i g h t s
>
> Issues/Questions arising from this discussion:
>
> (a) Is the Web-based journal technology alienating?
> (b) Why are some authors not submitting revisions? (I think, we have had
> 2-3
> cases of this.)
> (c) Are authors submitting to JRP to get feedback to publish elsewhere?
> (d) Could we have an article on what makes a good JRP article?
> (e) Could we have a typology of articles published in JRP?
> (f) Could we restate the scope and objectives of the journal more clearly?
> (g) Could we give a list of areas on which we are looking for
> contributions?
> (h) Could we mentor aspiring authors?
>
> . . .


Gautam Bhattacharyya
Department of Chemistry
Clemson University
Clemson, SC 29678
Phone: 864-656-1356
FAX: 864-656-6613

Recently the Belogradchik E-Mail List at Yahoo,

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/belogradchik

has been expanded as a clearinghous of historical and modern photographs
and also texts from rare or forgotten books and other documents. The
number of these items increases rapidly.
Here are three examples:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/belogradchik/message/356
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/belogradchik/message/362
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/belogradchik/message/367

Anyone who is interested in local/family history and cultural heritage
studies could benefit by visiting that List.

B.V. Toshev

JRP Submission ID#153
Title: Building Social Sustainability Within Cross-Cultural Research
Practice
Section: Main Article
Submitted: Nov 26, 2008
Size: About 8,500 words (including notes and references)

ABSTRACT: Undertaking qualitative research in social science contexts
requires a reflexivity and capacity for introspection. This need is
amplified when working in cross cultural milieu. Indigenous peoples
are weary of the researcher gaze. This paper reflects upon the
personal journey taken by a doctoral researcher in the field of
Indigenous resource management. In presenting this experience, the
nexus between research and practice is considered, and the importance
of basing cross cultural research on principles of social
sustainability highlighted. The paper concludes with a presentation of
a research framework which incorporates these values to facilitate
rigorous and ethical research practice.

KEYWORDS: indigenous; research; social sustainability; Australia;
cross-cultural research

EXCERPTS:

In Australia, a wide range of research protocols and guidelines are
available for application in cross cultural research contexts. For
example, the Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Studies (AIATSIS) has a set of principles that can be used as
a basis for negotiations with Indigenous communities . . . [see
http://www.aiatsis.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/3512/EthicsGuideA4.pdf ]

These protocols provide a sound starting basis for engaging Indigenous
communities. However, it is important to note, the case study for this
paper shows that such protocols are simply that, a start. . . .

Having established a set of working baselines for the research, a
decision was made to develop a research protocol, and comprised the
first step in the fieldwork at Hope Vale. Such protocols have been
found to be useful in building bridges between cultural perceptions of
the project at hand . . .

Overall, the four stage framework developed and implemented during
this research project attempted to ensure that the research was
conducted in a cross culturally appropriate and academically credible
way. Critical reflection highlights that there were still a number of
issues that nonetheless needed addressing in the specific context of
working with Hope Vale. . . .

Having worked through this research framework, the parties involved,
will be able to establish and be engaged in the production of socially
just conservation research processes and outcomes. There are a number
of advantages to this engagement process in research contexts. First
it ensures that, prior to any research process getting underway each
party has a clear understanding of each other's perspective, their
differences and similarities. . . .

--

Reviewers familiar with such issues may kindly respond.

DP
--

New article in JRP:

Jones, P., Bunce, G., Evans, J., Gibbs, H., & Ricketts Hein, J.
(2008). Exploring space and place with walking interviews. Journal of
Research Practice, 4(2), Article D2. Retrieved November 14, 2008, from
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/150/161

DP
--

JRP Submission ID#152
Title: Scientific Thinking and Modernity Meet Traditional Culture
Section: Main Article
Submitted: Nov 12, 2008
Size: About 12,000 words (including notes and references)

ABSTRACT:
This paper examines a fundamental challenge in today's world: the
conflict between scientific thinking (i.e., analytic/systematic
thinking)--and its accompanying notion of modernity--and traditional
culture. The global conflicts concerning resources, development, and
governance we see in contemporary times are really all about the
meeting of modernity with tradition. That is, the basic question is
this: Are we moving towards a Western analytical way of thinking and
living, or a different model? The answer may be that the scientific
thinking and traditional culture are irreconcilable, and so a
prediction for the future may be very difficult indeed.

Cultures around the world have pursued different paths. Ostensibly,
countries like the U.S. and Japan have embraced modernity
wholeheartedly while places like Sudan and Afghanistan have not.
Countries which embraced modernity--that is, countries which have
become industrialized and urbanized--have a long history, moreover, of
colonizing countries which remained agrarian and un-urbanized.

But really, the definitions are not so simple. People living in
apparently modern cultures, such as the U.S., often reject scientific
approaches to problems, and operate from traditional, religious, or
other kinds of belief systems. Other cultures, such as the Japanese,
seemingly embrace modernity, but continue to maintain a sublimated
layer of spiritual and mystical thinking.

KEYWORDS: science; culture; history; tradition; modernity

--

This situates "research practice" (or what we might call open and
organised inquiry) within the broad social and cultural environments
prevailing around the world. Reviewers familiar with such topics may
kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

Dear Friends,

The latest issue of JRP has been published online:

Journal of Research Practice (JRP)
Volume 4, Issue 2, 2008
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/issue/view/8

Currently, it shows only one article besides the list of reviewers for
Volume 4:

* PhD by Publication: A Student's Perspective
(Lisa M. Robins, Peter J. Kanowski)

* Submission Reviewers for Volume 4, 2008

In fact, some more articles are in the pipeline, at different stages
of revision and copyediting. These will be added to the same issue as
and when they become available.

DP
--

N.B. We require a fast turn-around for this one -- preferably within a
week.

JRP Submission ID#150
Title: Don't Walk, Walk: Exploring Space and Place With Walking Interviews
Section: Research Design
Submitted: October 14, 2008
Size: About 3500 words (including references)

ABSTRACT:
This paper explores the use of walking interviews in qualitative
research. In spite of a wave of interest in methods which take
interviewing out of the 'safe,' stationary environment, there has been
limited work critically examining the techniques for undertaking such
work. Curiously for a method which takes an explicitly spatial
approach, few projects have attempted to rigorously connect what
participants say with where they say it. The paper reviews three case
studies where the authors have used different techniques, including
GPS, for locating the interview in space. The paper concludes by
arguing that researchers considering using walking interviews need to
think carefully about what kinds of data they wish to generate when
deciding which approach to adopt.

KEYWORDS: walking interviews; go-along; mobile methods; GPS

EXCERPTS:
Whether considering movement by the participant or the researcher,
mobility takes the research process out of fixed (safe, controlled)
environments and introduces a range of new variables to consider. . . .

One of the key purposes of the go-along and walking interviews more
generally is to examine a participant's relationship with the
environment and yet spatial location is often dealt with rather
crudely. . . .

Clearly the ability to link words and location unlocks the potential
of walking interviews for tackling more explicitly spatial issues.
The authors have been working on a number of projects exploring some
of the technical challenges that this poses.  This paper now examines
three case studies . . .

--

Reviewers familiar with these issues may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

Journal of Research Practice (JRP)
Listed in EBSCO

JRP is now listed in EBSCO's  "Academic
Search Complete" database. JRP
articles will appear in EBSCO search
where this service is available,
with access to this particular database.

DP
--

Dear Research_Practice Members,

The JRP editorial team is delighted to announce the names of the best
reviewers for Volume 4, 2008. The Award is given in recognition of
their superb quality of review, readiness to take up new submissions,
fast turn-around time, and overall, their persistent support to
establish JRP as a leading transdisciplinary journal.

JRP Best Reviewer Award, 2008

1. Anne R. Richards, Kennesaw State University, USA
2. Dianne Allen, University of Wollongong, AUSTRALIA
3. Jacob D. Vakkayil, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, INDIA
4. Melissa Nursey-Bray, Australian Maritime College, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA
5. Robert Smith, Robert Gordon University, UK
6. Sevasti-Melissa Nolas, University College London and The Anna Freud
Centre, UK
7. Zvi Bekerman, Hebrew University, ISRAEL

This will also be announced in the next issue of JRP, due later this
month.

Editors
D. P. Dash
Héctor R. Ponce
--

PS: From the previous years:

JRP Best Reviewer Award, 2007
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/123/91

1. Janinka Greenwood, University of Canterbury College of Education,
NEW ZEALAND
2. Kristina Niedderer, University of Wolverhampton, UK
3. Martha Vahl, Community Operational Research Unit, University of
Lincoln, UK
4. Paul Grobstein, Bryn Mawr College, USA
5. Stephen Soldz, Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis, USA
6. Toni Weller, City University, UK


JRP Best Reviewer Award, 2006
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/69/62

1. Alistair Anderson, The Robert Gordon University, UK
2. François-Xavier Nsenga, Independent Researcher, Sociology &
Industrial Design, CANADA
3. Z. N. Patil, Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages,
Hyderabad, INDIA


JRP Best Reviewer Award, 2005
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/56/59

1. Ken Friedman, Norwegian School of Management, NORWAY and Demark's
Design School, DENMARK [Currently: Dean, Faculty of Design, Swinburne
University of Technology, Melbourne, AUSTRALIA]
2. Werner Ulrich, University of Fribourg, SWITZERLAND, and Open
University, UK
--

Dear Friends,

Here is a list of all the JRP submission reviewers for Volume 4, 2008
(i.e., those who have reviewed JRP submissions during October 2007 -
September 2008). The list will appear in JRP, 4(2), due in October
2008. Please point out any errors or omissions.

--

++Submission Reviewers for Volume 4, 2008++

Journal of Research Practice (JRP) acknowledges the significant
contributions made by the submission reviewers.

Anand Agrawal,  Independent Researcher and Consultant, INDIA

Anne R. Richards, Kennesaw State University, USA

Carey M. Noland, Northeastern University, USA

D. P. Dash, Xavier Institute of Management, INDIA

Dianne Allen, University of Wollongong, AUSTRALIA

Eliseo Vilalta-Perdomo, Tecnológico de Monterrey, MEXICO

Faith Wambura Ngunjiri, Bowling Green State University, USA

François Briatte, Institute of Political Studies, Grenoble, FRANCE

G. R. Chandrashekhar, Indian Institute of Management Indore, INDIA

Jacob D. Vakkayil, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, INDIA

Janinka Greenwood, University of Canterbury College of Education, NEW
ZEALAND

Kumar T., Institute of Rural Management, Anand, INDIA

Martha Vahl, Community Operational Research Unit, University of
Lincoln, UK

Melissa Nursey-Bray, Australian Maritime College, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA

Meenakshi Khemka, Globsyn Business School, Kolkata, INDIA

Nelda Mier, Texas A&M HSC School of Rural Public Health at South Texas
Center, USA

Nilamadhab Kar, Wolverhampton City Primary Care Trust, UK

Pratik Modi, Institute of Rural Management, Anand, INDIA

Rajiv Kumar, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, INDIA

Raymond Leslie Ison, The Open University, UK

Robert Smith, Robert Gordon University, UK

Rohit Vishal Kumar, Xavier Institute of Social Service, INDIA

Sevasti-Melissa Nolas, The London School of Economics and Political
Science, UK

Stephen Soldz, Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis, USA

William Ward, University of South Florida, USA

Z. N. Patil, Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages,
Hyderabad, INDIA

Zvi Bekerman, Hebrew University, ISRAEL

--

DP

Dear "Research_Practice" Members,

This is a request for your help in increasing membership in this
group. As you know, "Research_Practice" is being used as the
associated forum for the Journal of Research Practice (JRP). Most of
the JRP readers, reviewers, authors, and editorial members are members
of this group. In other words, it is the key link among the JRP community.

This community ought to grow, for the sake of developing JRP.
Therefore, I request you to publicise this group among your
colleagues, students, and research partners, and encourage them to
join the group.

DP
--

PS: YahooGroup: "Research_Practice"
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Research_Practice/

Description

Welcome to the online forum associated with the Journal of Research
Practice (JRP). The forum consists of research-inclined individuals
and research students from around the world, associated with multiple
specialist domains, who are interested in developing and promoting the
journal. The journal focuses on innovations in research practice and
research education. The journal is free-to-readers and it is hosted at
http://jrp.icaap.org/

To subscribe to "Research_Practice", please send your introduction to:
Research_Practice-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

JRP Submission ID#146
Title: Reflections on Navigating a Path of Engaged Scholarship
Section: Main Article
Submitted: Sep 5, 2008
Size: About 7000 words

ABSTRACT:
Community engagement is central to the public and civic mission of a
growing number of colleges and universities and numerous faculty
members are integrating teaching, research, and service into community
engagement activities. However, there have been few first-hand
descriptions of the career paths of faculty who engage in community
engaged scholarship. Through the use of an instrumental case study
design this paper describes the motivations, influences, and
experiences that have informed a tenured associate professor's
intentional efforts to integrate teaching, research, and service into
a professional identity as an engaged scholar.

This paper recounts the evolution of the professor's career from
graduate school in the early 1990s, to the present as he prepares for
promotion to full professor. The author begins with his experiences as
a doctoral student and considers how they led him to engaged
scholarship. Next he discusses his roles and contributions first as an
untenured assistant professor and then as a tenured associate
professor. Finally, he assesses his current situation as he approaches
promotion to full professor and includes thoughts about his future.
This story serves as an invitation for present and future scholars to
view their work through an engaged lens. The author invites these
scholars to think imaginatively about how engaging in pressing social
issues and developing respectful and productive relationships with
individuals and organizations at the local community level might
improve and advance their scholarship. The author's reflections
contribute to the emerging discussion about the theory and practice of
engaged scholarship by illuminating and interpreting its rewards and
challenges.

KEYWORDS: community engagement; engaged scholarship; faculty research;
career paths

EXCERPTS:

As a new professor I was enthusiastic, passionate and, on reflection,
rather idealistic about how I would make a contribution to the two
disciplines that encompassed my work – Urban Education and Physical
Education. My six-year quest for tenure was dominated by searching for
balance, integration, and opportunity within the academy to find
meaning in my work and to make the kind of contributions that I
envisioned. Three aspects of my work during those six years became the
means by which I found meaning and pursued the scholarship of
engagement: teaching and writing about my community-based programs,
developing a university-community partnership, and undertaking
community-based research. . . .

Tensions Between Doing Community Work and Writing About It

As an associate professor, distinctions between research, teaching,
and service have blurred as I have engaged in opportunities to pursue
subjects, issues, and questions that I care and seek to learn about
and, which in turn, feed my research, teaching, and community outreach
projects both inside and outside the university. . . .

--

Reviewers familiar with these issues and their relevance to the
development of research practice may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

JRP Submission ID#145
Title: THE RELIABILITY OF CODING OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES
Section: Main Article
Submitted: Sep 1, 2008
Size: About 9,900 words (7000 words, without references)

ABSTRACT:
The thrust of this article is on the reliability of coding. In this
study, we seek to examine how researchers from a variety of
disciplines approach the coding of open-ended responses and ensure
that the coding is reliable--meaning that regardless of the
circumstances, a reliable coding procedure will yield the same
results. We conducted an extensive literature review on coding in the
medical and social science fields. We also conducted a number of
interviews with researchers engaged in coding both in and out of
government. We conclude that more needs to be done to ensure the
coding reliability of open-ended responses.

KEYWORDS:
coding; reliability; open-ended survey responses

EXCERPTS:

In this article we examine how researchers from a variety of
disciplines approach reliability in coding. Because the medical field
has paid the most attention to this and most social scientists are not
familiar with coding in the medical arena, we cover medical coding
extensively in our literature review. In our literature review we also
cover reliability of coding in social research as practiced by
academics, governmental agencies and the private sector. We also
interviewed researchers in and out of government and report how
reliability is practiced.

One interesting find arising from this research is how reticent some
organizations were to provide us with information. . . .

There are a variety of factors that lead to poor coding, and thus
affect reliability. . . .

Because of the numerous factors affecting reliability, it comes as no
surprise that many analysts have noted the lack of reliability
statistics. . . .

Inherent in many reliability studies in the concept of a "gold
standard."  A gold standard is the "true" code. . . .

As noted previously, a number of studies have been conducted on coding
reliability. The following studies are not meant to be exhaustive.
There are thousands of such studies.  The studies that we have
included are simply illustrative of the vast array of literature that
is available. . . .

In this research we interviewed representatives from several disparate
organizations that conducted research requiring open-ended coding.
These organizations ranged from government to academic to the private
sector.  We wanted to know what these organizations did, if anything,
to ensure reliability in their coding. . . .

--

Reviewers familiar with these issues may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

JRP Submission ID#143
Title: Engaging Women who are Homeless through Emerging,
Community-Based Participatory Research Methods
Section: Main Article
Submitted: Aug 11, 2008
Size: About 6000 words

ABSTRACT:
Homelessness is becoming a more complex and prevalent problem in
Canadian cities. Enumeration of homeless people often is incomplete
and the number of women experiencing homeless is underestimated. Very
often, clients of homeless shelters are not consulted about their
requirements of facilities. This research study investigated the
conceptualization of home among women experiencing homelessness using
both emerging and traditional qualitative methods. The emerging
methods included digital storytelling, creative writing, a design
charrette and photovoice and qualitative interviewing was also
conducted. We recorded all discussions and conducted qualitative
analysis on the obtained transcribed texts using ATLASti 5.0 to
understand the themes, ideas and trends in the data. This paper
discusses the effectiveness of the emerging and multiple methods and
the use of community partnerships to conduct the research and empower
the participants. Our findings highlight that multiple methods allows
for triangulation of the data and increased validity, though the
methods have to adapted for use with vulnerable populations, such as
with people experiencing homelessness. We conclude by discussing how
these emerging and the use of multiple methods may be applicable in
other populations.

KEYWORDS:
qualitative research; community-based participatory research; homeless
women; research methods; interdisciplinarity

EXCERPTS:
Six women participated in the design charrette. First, we gave the
participants a brief introduction to plan, section and elevation
drawing types that may have been useful to them in expressing their
design. . . . Once each person was satisfied that their drawing
contained all of the essential concepts, they began construction of a
three-dimensional graham cracker version of their design. . . .

During the fourth workshop, we presented the photovoice products,
including the photographs with the text, to each participant. The
participants had opportunities to discuss their own materials and
share each other's photovoice products. . . .

The research question sought to understand a rich conceptualization of
home and to determine both the physical requirements and necessary
programs and other support requirements of shelters that were
important to the participants. Certain research methods were more
appropriate for specific aspects of the research. . . .

In using emerging methods, digital storytelling, creative writing, and
the design charrettes, we could not ascertain how effective the
methods were in and of themselves; as they are not referenced
adequately in the literature. . . .
--

Reviewers familiar with these issues may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

JRP Submission ID#141
Title: Collecting and Interpreting Life Stories of Victims and
Perpetrators of Social Trauma
Section: Main Article
Submitted: July 18, 2008
Size: About 5800 words

ABSTRACT

Documenting and understanding the experiences of individuals who have
lived through extreme social traumas is a difficult task. In this
article we present interview and analytical methods that are sensitive
for research of such populations. We discuss the methodology of
biographical interviewing and offer multiple ways to approach
interpretation of the interviews. The analyses, undertaken jointly by
researchers working in a small group, combine transcription of the
taped interviews, holistic and part readings of the interviews, with
chronological, global and thematic analyses, and uses of metaphors.

Keywords: biographical research; life story; interviewing; analysis;
social trauma

--
EXCERPTS

After we finish identifying and discussing the themes, we then put
them aside and look for metaphors that can capture the interviewee, in
general. Life story interviews tend to be long, multifaceted and
complex. Whereas the previous analysis helps us examine major themes
in the biographers' lives, it is helpful to take a step back and to
approach the interpretation in a holistic manner. This is the aim of
the metaphor stage of analysis. Metaphors are creative ways to
translate/convert biographers' lives to meaningful descriptions. . . .

We must remain aware of the potential hierarchical
(researcher-biographer) power relations that are associated with
gender, class, ethnicity, race, nationality, etc. Therefore, we must
not place the research goals of developing metaphors above respect
toward the biographers, even though they might never know that their
stories have been ridiculed or judged.
--

Reviewers familiar with these issues may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

Dear Friends,

About 3 months back, we had initiated a review exercise for the
Journal of Research Practice (JRP), to identify any areas requiring
innovation and change. The following were used as trigger questions:

1. Who is reading JRP?
2. How many are reading JRP?
3. How useful are JRP articles?
4. What is the "impact" of JRP articles?
5. How can we attract more submissions?

Some responses have been received (appended at the end). Here are my
reflections after reading the responses.

1. FOCUS: Management? Education?

Somehow, there seems to be an impression that this journal is related
to the disciplines/fields of "management" or "education." We need to
work on this. JRP is about the practice of open inquiry, no matter
where it occurs. Of course, there is a lot being discussed about the
practice of inquiry in the applied fields, such as management, public
administration, education, health care, design, and so forth.

Is there anything substantial enough to discuss on the practice of
inquiry (or research practice) -- so that an entire journal may be
devoted to it? Of course, JRP exists assuming that the answer is "yes."

Consider this book:

The Nature of Research: Inquiry in Academic Contexts. Book by Angela
Brew. Published by RoutledgeFalmer, London, 2001, 205 pp., ISBN
0-415-21407-6 (pbk.).

The focus of this book matches somewhat with the focus of JRP. I say
somewhat because JRP is not limited to "academic contexts" alone.
However, it is true that most of our articles so far are addressed to
academic contexts. We need to work on that.

2. READERS: Limited reading time?

This is an important issue. JRP hopes to publish articles that any
researcher should find worthwhile to read -- no matter in what
substantive areas the researcher is interested. We need to work on this.

3. ARTICLES: Esoteric? Fuzzy?

JRP articles seem to appear esoteric and fuzzy. What to do? We need to
work on this as well.

4. EDITORS/REVIEWERS: Backgrounds?

Our editorial members and reviewers come from diverse backgrounds --
not all of them from academic contexts. Of course, most of them are
working in academic contexts.

We would remain open to welcome more members/reviewers, whose work is
aligned with the focus of this transdisciplinary journal.

DP
--


JRP Review Exercise
RESPONSES RECEIVED

** Many thanks to all who responded **

RESPONCE # 1
Darla Himeles, Bryn Mawr College, USA

I can share anecdotally that a friend of mine, a faculty member at the
Community College of Philadelphia, shared with her colleagues in the
English department the article that I co-wrote with Jody Cohen and
Alice Lesnick.  They discussed it and how it applies (or not) to their
teaching.  So, some -- a few -- community college faculty are now
aware of it!

Perhaps being sure that colleges and universities link to JRP as a
scholarly journal on their library websites would increase readership.

The impact of JRP articles should be great.  I know that colleagues of
mine who have read our article have found it significant/interesting.

I can't speak more broadly than that, though!


RESPONCE # 2
Ramendra Singh, Doctoral Student(Marketing), IIM Ahmedabad, INDIA

Although I was a reviewer once for JRP and used to also read other
articles being published in the journal, I have stopped reading it as
I find the articles very esoteric, abstract, and fuzzy.

In my limited knowledge and understanding as a doctoral student, I
have come across hardly any FPM reading or have ever read JRP
articles. ["FPM" stands for Fellow Programme in Management -- a
doctoral programme in management followed in some Indian institutions.]

Is there a point for such a journal to exist? Should it change? Is it
making an impact? These are hard but worth asking at this juncture. Is
JRP making an impact on management research or education in India or
elsewhere? Is it possible to calculate its impact factor today or few
years down the line? Then what would that be?

Having said that my suggestions worth 2 cents on the above issues
would be make JRP less esoteric and eclectic to increase the
readership. It should appeal to common problems of management
researchers rather than abstract conceptualizations of some
intellectual minds.

In India, given the nascent stage of management research, JRP has the
potential to capture a large share of mind of the doctoral students as
well as other management researchers in India, Asia-pacific, and other
parts of the world.

Invite special issues through chosen editors to bring out issues on
some common theme which would be helpful to specific sections of the
academia, e.g., doctoral students and young faculties, on research
areas such as consumer behavior, organization behavior, etc.

JRP is about research in practice. But is it making a worthwhile
impact on either research or practice or practice of research? To me,
its visibility, share of mind, readership, and impact are negligible.
It is time to take this journal into a new trajectory under the
intellectual leadership of the editorial team. Worth a thought if new
members from academia and practitioners can be invited to join the
editorial board as well as editorial review board.

All the best to the Journal and hope to revive reading the journal.
Request that the above comments be read in a constructive spirit, as
these are not meant to demean any person or object.


RESPONCE # 3
Christine Frank, Christine Frank & Associates, CANADA

My honest answer, now that I have a little time to respond, is that
the journal is not useful in my work. I have just looked back at it,
looking at the article titles in the current issue. I do not work in
academia but rather in applied social research not connected to a
university. The topics are very academic in nature, and I would
suggest that even for academics, the spread of topics is very broad.
Most people need to focus their limited reading time on articles
directly related to their working area.


RESPONCE # 4
Gautam Bhattacharyya, Department of Chemistry, Clemson University, USA

I think an advertisement in the "Chronicle of Higher Education" in the
US would be a good way to disseminate the existence of this journal.
Unfortunately, I do not have any useful insight regarding the other
points.


RESPONCE # 5
Anil Kumar, Rourkela Steel Plant, INDIA

Who is reading JRP? -- Most of the research Scholars.
How many are reading JRP? -- Around 300 (in my view).
How useful are JRP articles? -- Very very use specially for making
research reviews.
What is the "impact" of JRP articles? -- Creating a passion to write
management articles.
How can we attract more submissions? -- By asking each & every member
to send e-mail IDs and addresses of prospective readers.

--


--- In Research_Practice@yahoogroups.com, "Debiprasad Dash"
<dpdash@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> Journal of Research Practice (JRP)
> ISSN 1712-851X
> http://jrp.icaap.org/
>
> The journal JRP has completed 3 years and crossed many milestones.
> We think it is time to initiate a review exercise and identify any
> areas requiring innovation and change.
>
> Towards this, we have the following questions:
>
> 1. Who is reading JRP?
> 2. How many are reading JRP?
> 3. How useful are JRP articles?
> 4. What is the "impact" of JRP articles?
> 5. How can we attract more submissions?
>
> Please reply to this message, answering any of the above questions
> or raising any new question(s) you consider relevant.
>
> DP and Héctor
> --
> D. P. Dash, PhD
> India
> dpdash@...
>
> Héctor R. Ponce, PhD
> Chile
> hponce@...

JRP Submission ID#140
Title: Participatory Research as Decolonizing and Decolonial Praxis
Section: Main Article
Submitted: July 8, 2008
Size: About 7000 words

ABSTRACT

The advocates of participatory research agree that the impetus of this
method is to attempt to restructure power relations in the research
process, to honour the knowledge and strengths within/of diverse
communities, and to challenge the dynamics of inequalities by
furthering the struggle for social justice. But how does participatory
research participate in the process of decolonization?

This paper will explore the ethical, social, and epistemological
assumptions and values informing participatory research from the
perspective of decolonization of methodologies. This work will also
highlight decolonizing and decolonial praxis as employed in the
researchers' present projects which aim to build dialogical spaces
with marginalized school communities in Vancouver, B.C.

EXCERPTS

Beginning from the specific research, pedagogical and relational
contexts in which we are presently situated, we hope to come together
to extend our work into a larger . . . participatory research project
with marginalized parent communities. This project will be rooted in
decolonizing and decolonial research praxis and will aim to build
dialogical spaces with parents who have been  historically, socially,
and institutionally marginalized due to racism, sexism, heterosexism,
ableism, and classism  in school communities in Vancouver, B.C. As we
plan our collaborative community research we find ourselves engaged
with/in complex realities, questions, and questionings of
possibilities and impossibilities of meaningful decolonizing research.
This paper will attempt to highlight some of these ambiguities and
tensions in our current work as well as the emerging questions,
learnings, and research dilemmas for our future community co-created
research.  In the spirit of decolonization and decolonial praxis, each
of our narratives below acknowledges the importance of our communities
as significant theorists informing our work along with the theorists
of the academy. . . .

The power of the subaltern studies' group along with the work of
decolonizing scholars  is that they have found a way to address and
help researchers pay attention to two of the deepest and most hurtful
wounds -- epistemological wounds and ontological colonial wounds --
left/produced by the western colonial regimes. We recognize that we
touch these wounds even in the process of conducting participatory
research when we speak about "collecting data," "analyzing findings,"
"research implementation," "dissemination of results."
--

Interested reviewers may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

JRP Submission ID#139
Title: Venturing Into the Unknown of Ethnography: Reflexive Questions
to Love and Cautionary Ethics to Live by
Section: Provocaive Idea
Submitted: June 29, 2008
Size: About 6000 words

ABSTRACT

This article summarizes the discovery of an ethnographic self, the use
of reflexive tales as methodology, and the development of four
cautionary ethics for novice ethnographers. Ethnographic ethics to
live by include: demonstrating care and concern, accepting risk and
uncertainty, suspending judgment, and exercising the art of listening,
selection, and representing. Each ethic was lived in the field,
developed through reflexive questioning, and further constructed,
articulated, and re-envisioned through research literature. The
discussion of these four ethics is contextualized within an inquiry
that focused on the use of text-to-speech technology in a Grade 5
classroom. Within these ethics, students were valued as collaborators
in the process, offering suggestions to the inquiry when relevant. In
the end, they felt comfortable viewing and articulating text-to-speech
technology as either an intrusion to their reading process, a choice
that they should each have access to, or a life tool.

Keywords: ethnography; reflexivity; ethics; qualitative research

EXCERPTS

Throughout this paper, I have presented, through snippets of
conversation, fieldnote and research journal excerpts, published
research, and relevant literature, my philosophical and ethical
locations as researcher. I have explored in depth my research and
ethical subjectivities from the outset and insights as they evolved
throughout the inquiry. One of my dominant strengths was the ability
to write through the tensions and uncertainties in an effort to
understand what my participants were telling me within the context of
the inquiry (citation); this required great risk on my part and an
ability to hear not only what participants were saying, but what they
were not saying as well.

--

Interested reviewers may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

JRP Submission ID#137
Title: A Practitioner's Inquiry Process and Improving It
Section: Main Article
Submitted: June 24, 2008
Size: About 9000 words

ABSTRACT

The process of inquiry is a significant tool in any professional
practice. Improving a professional's inquiry process becomes an
important development task, which may include exploring alternative
inquiry options, or undertaking the second-order process of inquiring
into inquiry. This article draws on experience to raise issues about a
practitioner's understanding of inquiry. Those issues are checked
against the current field knowledge to consider more of what might be
involved in improving professional practice by examining a
practitioner's inquiry processes. Inquiring into inquiry, using a
practitioner's lens, is then found to offer some pointers to more
effective practice-relevant research and researcher formation education.

EXCERPTS

In the current literature on inquiry, especially inquiry of human and
associated social phenomena, it is often usual to find three major,
different, perspectives and approaches identified: the
empirical-analytic; the interpretive; the social critical. The
literature often indicates that this threefold distinction has been
resurrected by Habermas and can be seen to have some of its roots in
the work of Aristotle. . . .

Finding the focus that is most salient for inquiry into inquiry is a
significant first step. I have found that Toulmin's work helps cut a
large literature down to manageable proportions. . . .

Considering how a practice of inquiry might be improved becomes a
matter of learning to change, a second-order process, and where the
use of inquiry might well be involved in the change process, doubling
the second-order, reflexive, component. For inquiry occurring in a
professional practice context, particular constraints arise, and
improving inquiry needs to occur within those constraints. . . .

--

Reviewers familiar with the above topics may kindly respond.

DP
--

PS: To do a review for JRP, you need to be a registered user at:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

Sharing a communication with Professor Christopher S. Hamlin,
Department of History, University of Notre Dame, USA

----- Original Message -----

From: Debiprasad Dash
To: Hamlin.1@...
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:18 PM
Subject: Journal of Research Practice (JRP)


To: Professor Christopher S. Hamlin
Department of History, University of Notre Dame, USA

Dear Professor Hamlin,

I came across your captivating review article in Minerva:

JUST DON'T CALL IT SCIENCE
Minerva (2008) 46:99–116
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p0612p4324773728/fulltext.pdf

It is such a treasure house of facts and insights on
science-in-society over the ages! My sincere congratulations to you
for capturing all of it in that single article!

May I introduce myself as one who is associated with the study of
research -- recognising research as human activity, as practice. I
cordially invite you to our journal, Journal of Research Practice
(JRP), available freely on the Web.

It is clear to me that many convenient characterisations of science
hardly serve to enhance the practice of science. I recognise that it
is still the researcher, engaged in everyday research acts -- maybe as
a cog in some giant institutional machinery or maybe in a lifetime of
independent inquiry -- who helps in pushing the frontiers of research
practice (not only the frontiers of knowledge).

With sincere regards,

DP
--
D. P. Dash, PhD
http://www.ximb.ac.in/~dpdash/

Journal of Research Practice (JRP)
http://jrp.icaap.org/

-----------------

REPLY

from Christopher S. Hamlin <chamlin@...>
to Debiprasad Dash <dpdash@...>
date 20 June 2008 02:25
subject Re: Journal of Research Practice (JRP)


Dear Dr. Dash,

Thank you for the kind words.

I will certainly look out for your journal.  It may well be suited for
inclusion in a course I teach on Science, Technology, and Society.

Yours
Christopher Hamlin

JRP Submission for Review ID#136
Title: PhD by Publication: A Student-Perspective
Date Submitted: June 16, 2008
Category: Main Article
No. of Words: About 7000

--
ABSTRACT

This paper presents my experiences as an Australian PhD student in the
arena of social science in undertaking a PhD by publication. I present
information and data on my experience of publishing eleven articles in
refereed journals, and reflect on this to inform other post-graduate
students and academics more broadly. The paper identifies the factors
that students should consider prior to adopting this approach - in
terms of university requirements, supervisors' attitudes, the research
subject matter, intellectual property, capacity and working style, and
issues of supervisor co-authorship. I then outline my perceptions of
the advantages and disadvantages of progressive publishing. In my
case, and I suggest more generally, the advantages outweighed the
disadvantages. I conclude by presenting a suite of lessons to guide
students through the publishing process: I suggest these comprise
developing information technology skills early, being open to
surprises, targeting the right journal, interpreting journal word
limits judiciously, using figures and tables effectively, addressing
reviewers' comments, expecting to receive conflicting comments, moving
on from article rejection, keeping the publishing process moving, and
listening to the advice of supervisors.

KEYWORDS: PhD; student; publishing; examination
--

Reviewers familiar with the discussions surrounding different forms of
doctoral programme -- such as traditional PhD, PhD by publication,
"new route PhD," professional doctorate, practice-based doctorate,
etc. -- may kindly respond by replying to this mail.

With regards,

DP
--

Note. In order to do a submission review for JRP, you need to be a
registered user at the JRP Web site:
http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/index

If you are not already a registered user, please send the following
information while responding to this mail:

* Preferred username:
(The username must contain only lowercase letters, numbers, and
hyphens/underscores.)
* First Name:
* Middle Name:
* Last Name:
* Preferred e-mail ID:
--