Problematizing Peer Review: Academic Librarians’ Pedagogical Approaches to Peer Review

Q2 Social Sciences
L. Wood, Gr Keer
{"title":"Problematizing Peer Review: Academic Librarians’ Pedagogical Approaches to Peer Review","authors":"L. Wood, Gr Keer","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION This study is the first to consider how academic librarians’ understanding of and participation in the peer review process influences their information literacy pedagogy and practice. METHODS This mixed-methods study uses a modified sequential explanatory design, beginning with a survey of academic librarians in the United States and Canada, followed by interviews with interested study participants. RESULTS & DISCUSSION The researchers find that academic librarians frequently teach about peer review, but approaches vary widely, and though some have adapted the Framework to fit their instruction about peer review, there are no best practices. Instructor demands, the length of instructional sessions, and student level influence whether and how academic librarians contextualize the peer review process. While some academic librarians draw from their personal experience in the peer review process as authors, reviewers, and/or editors in their teaching, academic librarians do not consistently report their personal experience as an influence on their teaching of the peer review process to students. CONCLUSION This article argues that academic librarians should consider the place of peer review in information literacy instruction, including interrogating how scaffolding instruction about peer review may provide a disservice to students from an equity perspective. The authors urge academic librarians who have it to draw on personal experience to contextualize their instruction about peer review.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":"9 1","pages":"2399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

INTRODUCTION This study is the first to consider how academic librarians’ understanding of and participation in the peer review process influences their information literacy pedagogy and practice. METHODS This mixed-methods study uses a modified sequential explanatory design, beginning with a survey of academic librarians in the United States and Canada, followed by interviews with interested study participants. RESULTS & DISCUSSION The researchers find that academic librarians frequently teach about peer review, but approaches vary widely, and though some have adapted the Framework to fit their instruction about peer review, there are no best practices. Instructor demands, the length of instructional sessions, and student level influence whether and how academic librarians contextualize the peer review process. While some academic librarians draw from their personal experience in the peer review process as authors, reviewers, and/or editors in their teaching, academic librarians do not consistently report their personal experience as an influence on their teaching of the peer review process to students. CONCLUSION This article argues that academic librarians should consider the place of peer review in information literacy instruction, including interrogating how scaffolding instruction about peer review may provide a disservice to students from an equity perspective. The authors urge academic librarians who have it to draw on personal experience to contextualize their instruction about peer review.
质疑同行评审:高校图书馆员的同行评审教学方法
引言本研究首次考虑了学术图书馆员对同行评审过程的理解和参与如何影响他们的信息素养教育和实践。方法这项混合方法研究采用了一种改进的顺序解释设计,首先对美国和加拿大的学术图书馆员进行调查,然后对感兴趣的研究参与者进行访谈。结果与讨论研究人员发现,学术图书馆员经常教授同行评审,但方法差异很大,尽管一些人已经调整了框架以适应他们关于同行评审的指导,但没有最佳实践。讲师的要求、教学环节的长度和学生水平会影响学术图书馆员是否以及如何将同行评审过程置于情境中。虽然一些学术图书馆员在教学中借鉴了他们作为作者、评审员和/或编辑在同行评审过程中的个人经验,但学术图书馆员并没有始终如一地向学生报告他们的个人经验对同行评审过程教学的影响。结论本文认为,学术图书馆员应考虑同行评审在信息素养教学中的地位,包括从公平的角度质疑同行评审的脚手架式教学如何对学生造成伤害。作者敦促有能力的学术图书馆员借鉴个人经验,将他们关于同行评审的教学置于情境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信