One other review board member’s manuscripts have been rejected twice-demonstrating that the double-blind review process maintains the same standard of rigor regardless of the source of a contribution. Since my tenure, there have only been four members of the review board who have published in the Annals-Stephanie Cawthon (regular refereed review and invited), Harold Johnson, Cheri Williams (regular refereed review and invited), and Ye Wang. In fact, prior to becoming Editor, I was a member of the Editorial Boards of several other journals, and their Editors strongly encourage contributions (actually tooting their horns for contributions). Not only can Editorial Board members contribute manuscripts I strongly encourage these members to do just that. The Annals also encourages theoretical (including metatheoretical) papers and position papers, but these works must be based on a strong, extensive integration of research studies and/or extant theory. In short, the Annals is a scholarly research journal that encourages the submission of primary (empirical) research (qualitative or quantitative) as well as secondary analyses (meta-analyses, research reviews, etc.). I have also attempted to encourage contributors to use more inclusive language in describing their samples (e.g., d/Deaf and hard of hearing) and to be meticulous in their inclusion of demographics of the sample (e.g., degree of hearing loss). With at least two methodologists as reviewers, I intend to accept manuscripts that have sound technical merits as well as adequate literature reviews.
I have no qualms with respect to the use of a specific research paradigm (e.g., quantitative, including single-subject designs qualitative, including critical and postmodernist analyses), or even with respect to theoretical framework (e.g., behaviorism, cognitivism, socioculturalism, or any other “isms”). The participants under study in these manuscripts represent users of a variety of communication modes (sign, speech, etc.) and a wide range of degrees of hearing loss, from slight to profound some participants are members of the Deaf culture (e.g., Deaf Identity, Deaf World, etc.).Īs Editor, I am committed to maintaining inclusiveness and to publishing high-quality articles that have proceeded through a rigorous review process. Topics include social-emotional development, writing, sign language interpreting, inquiry-based science instruction, use of captions, cochlear implantation, dual diagnosis (deafness and autism), the role of counselors, and memory research and deafness-among others. As per my goal to be inclusive, the accepted and published articles, from the initial issue in Spring 2011 to the present, cover a wide range of topics with implications for education and other relevant areas of interest. I am certain that the Annals has a tradition, buttressed by cultural or historical perceptions, that tends to influence the types of manuscripts that are submitted. I also provide some comments about the Editorial Board and review process, and conclude with a few tidbits-which may or may not be surprising. With the assistance of a couple colleagues (and a few little birdies), I have developed some questions with responses. During the past few days, a little birdie flew overhead and indicated repeatedly (via extremely loud chirps) that it was time to present information to the readers of the Annals.
0 kommentar(er)
