Pages

Showing posts with label academic publishing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label academic publishing. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 9, 2022

AFRICA - University systems in 45 countries have barely been studied [University World News, February 2022]

Title:
University systems in 45 countries have barely been studied 
 
Author:
Wagdy Sawahel  
 
Published:
University World News, 3 February 2022

From the article:
Higher education in Africa has become a frequently researched topic from 2000 onwards, but the tertiary systems in 45 out of 54 countries on the continent have barely been studied, and 20 countries lack internal higher education expertise.
 

Monday, March 15, 2021

Howard University & Columbia University - Howard and Columbia Universities to Collaborate on Black Studies Book Series [The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2021]

Title:
Howard and Columbia Universities to Collaborate on Black Studies Book Series
 
Published:
The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 12 March 2021
https://www.jbhe.com/2021/03/howard-and-columbia-universities-to-collaborate-on-black-studies-book-series/

From the article:
Howard University’s College of Arts Sciences announced a new ongoing scholarly book series in the field of Black studies called “Black Lives in the Diaspora: Past/Present/Future,” to be published by Columbia University Press in partnership with Columbia University’s African-American and African diaspora studies department.  
 
This collaboration between Howard University and Columbia University and its faculty is the first of its kind in academic publishing.

Friday, November 6, 2020

Edit reviews without permission? Some journal editors say it's OK [Scholarly article - Science, 2020]

Title:
Edit reviews without permission? Some journal editors say it's OK

Author:
Cathleen O'Grady

Published:
Science, Volume 370, Issue 6516, pp. 515-516 (2020)

Abstract:
A survey of 322 journal editors at high-impact journals across ecology, economics, medicine, physics, and psychology has found that 91% of editors would alter a peer-review report under certain circumstances, with or without the permission of the reviewer. More than 80% said they would edit a report if a reviewer used inappropriate or offensive language, or made personal comments about the authors, but 8% said they would change the reviewer's overall recommendation without their permission. The survey comes amid a wider push for consistent guidelines and concerns that a lack of clarity on the issue opens the door to corruption.