From reader comments, I'm still struggling to narrow my focus... but I've come up with the following idea. Any comments would be greatly appreciated!
Title: A Case Study of the Editorial Process: Collaboration techniques used by editors of Kairos, an online journal, in editorial review
How do the editors of the online journal Kairos use collaboration and collaborative analysis in the editorial review process? How do they work with scholars verses professionals and nonacademics? How do they balance the needs of their field with the needs of a successful journal? How do they select material for publication? How do they assess the field?
I’d like to interview Kairos editors (via email survey) about how they see their job in terms of field vs. journal. How do the editors use collaborative analysis in the editorial stage to facilitate this?
About Liz
- Liz Pohland
- Washington, DC, United States
- Welcome! I am currently a second-year PhD student in Texas Tech's Technical Communication and Rhetoric program. I am also editor of Intercom for the Society for Technical Communication. I began my academic career with a BA in English and French from Hollins College, with an emphasis in creative writing and poetry. In 1997, I graduated with my MA in English from Virginia Tech, intent on becoming an editor. My career in publishing started at Princeton University Press, as an editorial assistant to the English studies, anthropology, and art editors. After Princeton, I accepted an editorial and design position at the Folger Shakespeare Library, working on the academic journal Shakespeare Quarterly. I spent 10 years at the Folger, ultimately deciding that I was more interested in publishing, technology, and writing than in literary studies. In Fall 2008, I entered the Texas Tech program in TCR as an online student. Taking classes online has been an exciting adventure--one that I am so glad I had the opportunity to be a part of. I am now an on-campus student, thanks to a generous fellowship. I hope to finish my coursework by Summer 2010.
3 comments:
Liz,
I can’t wait to know the responses to those questions! You have done a great job of focusing on a fascinating subject. I suspect you may get more data to analyze than you need, even from this nicely narrowed field, but I think you can always focus even more at the analysis stage if you have more than you need. Becky will know for sure.
Are you going for exempt or expedited in your HSF/IRB proposal?
P.S. I'm just getting started in this program, too.
Wow, those are a lot of questions! While I think they are interesting and worth while, do you think that it is maybe a bit too broad for one semester of reasearch? I get excited and over-extend as well. I realized after reading Kuniavsky this week that i can't throw a whole bunch of different questions at my audience, and I only get a few months to do this research! I really liked your idea regarding how these people select articles to satisfy both the acadameic and workplace "versions" of TCers. After all, they belong to one big audience, but each has a fun and different rhetorical slant. I look forward to hearing more!
I'm really looking forward to seeing what you think of the readings, the IRB process, etc. in subsequent blog posts!
Post a Comment