التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
MENTOR REVIEWING: A RETROSPECTIVE ON AN EXPERIMENT. |
| المؤلفون: |
Allen, Mike1, Cynthia Cheng, Izumi, Mamko, Kopaczewski, Shana, Tye-Williams, Stacy, Wilkum, Kristi2 |
| المصدر: |
Communication Studies. Winter2003, Vol. 54 Issue 4, p530-534. 5p. |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
*MENTORING, *MANUSCRIPTS, *COUNSELING, *MEDICAL students, *APPLIED psychology, *BOOKS |
| مستخلص: |
This article focuses on mentorship reviewing. Normally, a manuscript receives three reviews from members of the editorial board evaluating the suitability of a manuscript for publication. The doctoral reviewer served as a fourth reviewer to the process. Doctoral students were recruited using a variety of methods. We would attend conferences and hand information to attract students. The issue of matching the manuscript to the available reviewer pool is obviously a bit difficult. A number of graduate reviewers suffered from the problem of be careful what you wish for, you may be reviewing it. A number of doctoral students found that taking a class in a method or a content area may leave you a bit short when it comes to reviewing a particular manuscript specialized in some very particular area. Mentors received the manuscript, all the reviews and decision letter. This permitted mentors to make comments long after the process of decision. Only evaluate a process by determining if the intent was served or reached. |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Academic Search Index |
