Journals Program Undergoes Major Change With a new organizational structure that includes six editors-in-chief, 40 editors and 175 Editorial Board members serving as reviewers, ASHA’s scholarly publications program transitions to a new editorial and review structure effective Jan. 1, 2017. The new structure implements a rigorous, fair and timely review process for submissions to ASHA’s ... ASHA News
Free
ASHA News  |   December 01, 2016
Journals Program Undergoes Major Change
Author Notes
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosodic Disorders / Hearing Disorders / Cultural & Linguistic Diversity / School-Based Settings / ASHA News & Member Stories / ASHA News
ASHA News   |   December 01, 2016
Journals Program Undergoes Major Change
The ASHA Leader, December 2016, Vol. 21, 58-59. doi:10.1044/leader.AN1.21122016.58
The ASHA Leader, December 2016, Vol. 21, 58-59. doi:10.1044/leader.AN1.21122016.58
With a new organizational structure that includes six editors-in-chief, 40 editors and 175 Editorial Board members serving as reviewers, ASHA’s scholarly publications program transitions to a new editorial and review structure effective Jan. 1, 2017.
The new structure implements a rigorous, fair and timely review process for submissions to ASHA’s journals: American Journal of Audiology, American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research (JSLHR), and Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools.
Each journal (and each section of JSLHR) has an editor-in-chief and five to 10 editors. Each editor, in turn, coordinates the work of at least four Editorial Board members, who serve as standing reviewers. The editors work on no more than 15 manuscripts each year; Editorial Board members review no more than eight per year.
Editors, who no longer need to spend time identifying and recruiting reviewers for each submitted manuscript, will be able to devote more time to actively recruiting and curating content. Having standing reviewers in place ensures that ASHA journals will continue to attract high-quality contributors who know their submissions will receive a timely and fair review.
In the previous structure, each journal (or section) had an editor and several associate editors, who assembled an ad hoc review panel for each submission. The task of recruiting reviewers has been overly arduous and time-consuming. The new model will not only speed up the review process, it will also provide an opportunity to enhance the quality and culture of peer review.
The new Journals Board, which replaces the Publications Board, includes the six editors-in-chief; three clinical representatives (one from audiology and one each from health care and school-based speech-language pathology); the chair of the Clinical Research, Implementation Science, and Evidence-Based Practice (CRISP) Committee; a public member; and an international member. The Journals Board is responsible for strategic planning, guidance, oversight and development of new initiatives.
The change results from the work of the Ad Hoc Committee on Strategic Planning for the Journals. The committee considered information collected through surveys of journal contributors, editors, reviewers and readers, and responds to current and emerging trends in scholarly publications.
“ASHA has many changes that are planned and under way, including how we conduct peer review for the journals, how we actively solicit manuscripts on targeted topics from groups of authors and from conference presenters and organizers in communication sciences and disorders, and how we more actively curate and promote knowledge translation,” explains Margaret Rogers, ASHA chief staff officer for research.
“Including three members on the Journals Board who can represent the needs and perspectives of ASHA’s clinical members is critical to our efforts to improve knowledge translation and the uptake of evidence-based practices,” she says, “as is including the CRISP Committee chair. We hope the changes will significantly shorten the time from submission to first decision, improve the quality and culture of the reviews, increase the amount and quality of the clinically applied content, and increase the impact of ASHA’s knowledge curation and translation efforts.”
0 Comments
Submit a Comment
Submit A Comment
Name
Comment Title
Comment


This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account ×
FROM THIS ISSUE
December 2016
Volume 21, Issue 12