Research in Peer-Reviewed Academic Journals

Process for Selecting and Publishing Manuscripts

School Library Research (SLR)

Manuscripts are reviewed by referees whose identities are unknown the authors and the author’s identify is likewise unknown by the reviewer.  

Acceptable manuscripts for research are evaluated based on their accuracy, originality, and relevancy.  The studies should represent a thorough review of the topic and data, and the information is delivered in a clear manner.

Essays include topics that are current and have a clear impact on school libraries. Considerable references should be included.

Literature review and proposal papers are extensively researched and include a summary of key points.  Explicit implications on the school library field in its current and future states must be included.

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP)

This publication’s material has a broad scope for all library settings: school, academic, public, and special.  

Manuscripts are considered based on their focus on the topics useful for librarians. Evidence based research on library practice, as well as commentary on other studies, are accepted.  The manuscripts should clearly demonstrated a direct impact on library and information services.

Submissions are evaluated by two peer reviewers in a double blind format.  While expertise of the reviewers is vital, no reviewer should have a conflict of interest.

Publications Editorial Authority

School Library Research (SLR)

All of the members on the editorial team hold a PhD degree and are faculty members of universities in the United States.  There are two co-editors and a dozen of school library science professionals who review the submissions and establish the guidelines of the publication.

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (EBLIP)

A significant amount of members on the editorial team are at the PhD level of education and are faculty members at large universities in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Czechia.  This publication has a vast listing of editors and reviewers. In addition to the editors, EBLIP enlists people on numerous committees, such as editorial advisors, copyeditors, evidence summaries, writing assistance, and peer reviewers.     


 SLR and EBLIP as Resources 

I found the SLR articles more relevant to my school librarian interests.  The articles included the librarian’s role as instructor, reading habits and perceptions of students, and technology topics.  I found the Moore and Cahill article about audiobooks interesting since that is a current trend for students. I did not fully read the Merga article about how avid readers develop, but I am interested in what was discovered.  As a reading teacher, I am intrigued by the separation of my avid readers and reluctant readers.

There were some articles in EBLIP that I found interesting, such as using the web versus databases for research, the library as a writing center, and librarians as technology instructors.  As mentioned, there was an article that analyzed the partnership between libraries and writing services to support student achievement that looked interesting. Additionally, while it does not directly impact my interest in school librarianship, I thought the article that ties university enrollment to library use was intriguing.  However, since the EBLIP articles include topics that relate to public and academic libraries, in addition to school libraries, many of the articles are not as relevant as the ones in SLR.

References

Logan, J. (2018). Students who used the library in their first year of university are more likely to graduate or still be enrolled after four years. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 13(4), 108-110.

Merga, M. K. (2017). Becoming a reader: Significant social influences on avid book readers. School Library Research, 20. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aasl/slr/volume20/merga.

Moore, J. & Cahill, M. (2016).  Audiobooks: Legitimate ‘reading’ material for adolescents? School Library Research, 19. Retrieved from   http://www.ala.org/aasl/slr/volume19/moore-cahill

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s