What makes for a quality peer review? TAA members’ perspectives

In preparation for this week’s Peer Review Week theme of “Quality in Peer Review”, I decided to reach out to several members of our TAA community for insight into the peer review process from either the author’s perspective, reviewer’s perspective, or both.

Regardless of the perspective, I asked for the answer to a single question, “What makes for a quality peer review process?” The insights of eight TAA members are shared below.

Most useful textbook and academic posts of the week: September 20, 2019

This week’s collection of articles from around the web is laden with questions. How do I approach an inter-disciplinary thesis? I’ve passed my comps – now what? How do I plan my first draft and get the right stuff in the right order? What are the ethical issues of working with literature? How can I be a good peer reviewer? How do we support research engagement? How can I deal with the growing complexities of international collaboration? And the theme across Peer Review Week 2019, how many ways can you define quality in peer review?

Ernest Hemingway once said, “We are all apprentices in a craft where no one ever becomes a master.” As we come to the close of Peer Review Week 2019 it is fitting to remember that our peers are apprentices as well in this craft. None of us have all of the answers to the questions above or the countless others that face us as academic writers. We learn from each other and grow stronger in our writing and disciplines as a result. This week, embrace your apprenticeship status and Happy Writing!