News

Below you will find the archive of all current and past news.

01.13.10: Online Article Submission System

We now offer an installion of the Open Journal Systems software to allow our member journals to receive and manage online article submissions to their journals. It is available at http://submissions.celj.org. This software is highly customizable and, among its many other features, allows for editors to configure requirements, sections, review process, and for the online submission and management of all content. If you would like to explore this software, please contact Mike Widner for details about setting up an account.

08.11.09: MLA, Call for Advisees, Chat With An Editor 2009

CHAT WITH AN EDITOR

About:

For the past ten years, in an effort to help younger scholars 
submitting their work to journals, the Council of Editors of Learned 
Journals, an Allied Organization of MLA, has sponsored "Chat with an 
Editor" at the MLA Convention. With so many requests from editors and 
authors to keep this program going, the MLA has stepped forward to officially sponsor these sessions, which will now take place in the room the MLA maintains for certain associated organizations.

The service gives scholars the opportunity to meet one-on-one with an 
experienced editor to discuss any aspect of the publication process. It 
is not an article vetting service, but rather a chance for authors to 
obtain advice on any aspect of writing, submitting, and publishing a 
journal article, in a neutral and friendly atmosphere. Advisors and 
advisees will meet in Room 203-B of the Philadelphia Convention Center. (Please note the chats will not take place in the book exhibit hall). In recent years, about half of the advisees have been graduate 
students and half have been assistant professors, postdocs, adjunct or part-time professors, and 
independent scholars.

What this service is:

What this service is not:

SCHEDULE OF CHAT ADVISORS
Monday Dec 28

9-10  Arthur Kinney and Thomas Hopper, English Literary Renaissance
10-11 James Phelan, Narrative
11-12  Batya Weinbaum, Femspec
12-1 Maire Mulllins, Christianity and Literature
1-2 William Baker, Year's Work in English Studies/Eliot-Lewes Review
2-3 Barbara Cantalupo, Edgar Allan Poe Review
3-4 Richard Kopley, Resources for American Literary Study
4-5 Catherine Tosenberger, Jeunesse: Young People, Texts, Cultures

Tuesday Dec 29

9-11 Michael Cornett, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies
11-1 Thomas Wortham, Nineteenth Century Literature
1-3 John Bryant, Leviathan
3-4 Peter Rudnytsky, American Imago
4-5 Jana Argersinger, ESQ

MAKING YOUR RESERVATION
To reserve a free 20-minute meeting time on Monday, December 28, or 
Tuesday, December 29, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., contact Professor Nicholas Birns of Eugene Lang College, The New School, at birnsn@newschool.edu. Supply your name, affiliation, and position 
(graduate student, assistant professor, independent scholar, etc.), and 
indicate three times in order of preference (1 = most preferred), or 
indicate that any time is okay.

The last day to make a reservation is Saturday, December 19. You will receive 
confirmation of your meeting time by December 20-22 at the latest, or 
somewhat earlier if the slots "sell out" and the schedule can be 
finalized. Once the schedule is full, a wait list will be made, and 
these advisees will be given meeting times as cancellations create new 
openings.

Because of the popularity of this program, it is advisable to make 
your reservation as soon as possible. Every effort will be made to 
accommodate necessary, last-minute changes and cancellations, but please 
only make a reservation if you are reasonably certain of keeping it.

05.10.09: MLA Display 2009

Once again, CELJ will be offering display opportunities at MLA. We will display journals at our own booth at the exhibit hall in the Marriott as well as in the MLA-sponsored room where Chat With An Editor will be occurring. Dr. Jean Knight of the University of Pennsylvania has graciously offered to assist us by receiving the journals. Please send up to 3 copies of your journal (they can be 3 copies of the same issue, or three different issues, or two of one and one of another)

c/o Dr. Jean Knight
Department of Romance Languages
521 Williams Hall
255 S. 36th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305

Please do not start sending them until October 15 and please send them so that they arrive before December 22 as Dr. Knight cannot receive packages after that point. Given the holiday season, please allow for two weeks for packages to arrive. Overseas people should send Air mail, sea mail is not guaranteed to come in time even if you were to send them now.

Feel free to send brochures or other promotional material but I would discourage simply mimeographed paper as it is so hard on stand up and it tends not to be visible. Brochures that can stand up on a rack are preferred.

Presses who are members as presses--there are only two or three among our membership. can send three copes of any journal they publish.

16.09.09: TLS Advertising

16th September, 2009

Dear CELJ Member,

The Times Literary supplement invites you to participate in the next Learned Journals / CELJ issue on October 30th 2009.

With an estimated international readership in excess of 100,000 and extra copies of the paper available at the MLA Conference, this provides an ideal platform from which to market your journal at a special advertising rate.

The exclusive rate available to all CELJ members for this edition is just £11 ($18.15 US dollars) per single column centimetre (a saving of 50% off our rate card price). Prices have been held from 2008.
The minimum size available is 5cm x 1 column (2 ½” wide x 2” deep) just £55/$90.75 (+VAT).

Booking and copy deadline for this issue is October 22nd 2009, please find specification details and booking information here:

Please note that this will be the only issue featuring Learned Journals until November 2010.

If you have any further questions, please contact me on tel: +44 (0)20 7782 4974, fax: +44(0) 20 7782 4966, or email: linsey.kenhard@newsint.co.uk

Yours sincerely

Linsey Kenhard
Display Advertisement Sales Manager

06.04.09: The 2009 CELJ Awards Competition

The Council of Editors of Learned Journals is pleased to invite the participation of CELJ members (whether new or longstanding) in our 2009 Awards Competition, which is organized under two broad headings:

I. The CELJ Award for Literary Achievement (1 category)
II. The CELJ Awards for Scholarly Achievement (7 categories)

For guidelines and other competition details, click here.

04.21.09: The Fragmentation and Reification of the Scholary Journal

Remarks from the president of the Council of Editors of Learned Journals (CELJ), delivered to the Conference of Historical Journals, AHA, on 4 January 2009.

An ironic 'perfect storm' faces scholarly journals in humanistic and social scientific fields. This major convergence concerns all academics today. At the end of my remarks I also mention two other, perhaps related, matters that are of special concern to journal editors.

1. IDENTITY AND FRAGMENTATION.

What is a scholarly journal and how are journals now perceived? All scholarly journals share ISSN numbering but even that descriptive measure is not predictive. Some 'journals' also have ISBN numbers for commercial purposes so that (as annuals) they also have a crack at being adopted as 'book series' by libraries. Some journals publish twice a year, some of us thrice, some quarterly, some even more frequently. As scholars and editors, we traditionally have a laissez-faire attitude toward the frequency of journal production. What we shared until recently was a sense that the academic journal appeared between covers as a deliberately constructed series of articles, sometimes on a common theme. We expect a 'good' academic journal to be committed to advancing knowledge in its field and to adhere to certain conventions: a standard of documentation, of double blind peer review, of 'value-added' editorial supervision and intervention. Aside from those elements (and perhaps even those aren't entirely shared) there is no common agreement as to what defines a 'scholarly journal.'

Now, however, excepting the case of those lucky Luddites who are print-only, academic essays that emanate from journals are increasingly accessed by electronic means, often through e-consolidators (e.g., JSTOR, Project Muse, Ebsco) whose readers search for particular content and individual essays rather than for the overall vision that often marks a particular journal. New e-journals spring up every day and some of these seek ISSN numbering. In general, however, the journal itself becomes invisible to the 'end-user.'

In our new technological environment, the role and status of editor, of peer review, of copyright (e.g., fair use) are shifting. The identity of the journal may be lost as access to content may actually increase.

We editors appeal to our professional associations to work with us (CELJ), the library community, bibliographers, information technology specialists, and other scholars to develop conventions for selecting new, more sophisticated metadata to enable more complete searches. We also appeal to our professional associations to work with us to investigate new forms of data-mining designed for sharing scholarship rather for profiting from product sales.

2. IDENTITY REIFICATION OF JOURNALS THROUGH PROPOSED ERIH RATINGS. Ironically, just as journal identity is fragmented by new modes of reader access, it is now reified by the grades (A,B,C, etc.) being developed by the European Reference Index for the Humanities as well as by groups in Australia and New Zealand (check on-line for your favorite journals' ranking). CELJ members have expressed a range of reactions to these ratings: a) intellectual contempt for the idea or the process for such rankings in the non-objective world of humanist endeavors; b) fear that their journals would be included or excluded from consideration; c) pleasure or anger at the seemingly whimsical assignment of grades by a group of scholars seemingly unfamiliar with their fields. It is doubly ironic that this new judgment occurs just as our peers in science and social science themselves have begun to query the reliability of —and to manipulate the results of—the 'citation index' formulas (for one example, see http://ideas.repec.org) that are the basis for evaluation in those fields though it is not yet the basis for grading in ERIH.

After the initial shock earlier about ERIH in 2007 and 2008, more journal editors have come to see the likely inevitability of some evaluation scheme in our bean-counting world. ERIH claims that its goal is to aid journals and their contributors, but it will inevitably inform institutional assessments and may result in rigid common protocols for scholarly journals.

CELJ now moves to new questions dedicated to some basic goals: How do we continue to nurture new modes of scholarship? How do we mentor younger scholars about scholarly publication? How do we—or should we—renew our commitment to the journal as a mode not only of specialist learning but also as a form of common discourse dedicated to developing the public intellectual?1

How do scholars, editors, and even publishers contribute to or gain control over this process? Can metrics be developed that more accurately represent humanist work than current citation indices or newer 'usage' indices? How might the publishing community (university presses as well as for-profit presses) respond to these rankings?

To consider these concerns, we need the collaborative help of adroit librarians as well as the swift intervention of our national associations in the humanities and social sciences—from the MLA and AHA and parallel organizations up to the NEH and ACLS.

In this emerging 'perfect storm' we need to collaborate at all levels and to appeal to our representative institutions for their active intervention. Rather than falling prey to the ERIH model, we need to bring together the most forward thinkers in academe in order to develop our own models. Consider this an appeal.

Bonnie Wheeler,
President, CELJ
www.celj.org

*********

Rob Townsend from AHA then responded, followed by Martin Burke, from the Journal of the History of Ideas, then Rob Schneider, from the American Historical Review. Discussion ensued. It was mentioned by an original assessor of the ERIH rankings that an agreement was originally reached that these ratings were not allowed to assess journals prescriptively but simply to provide a diagnostic canvassing of the framework in which scholars and editors operated; yet at the same time the ERIH webpage mentions that authors may well wish to consider these rankings in deciding where to submit articles. It was observed that certain criteria of the journal ranking, which may be pertinent within the European Union, are less so in the US. For instance, the example was given that the ERIH valuation of general over specialized journals was partially e.g. to make sure Romanian philosophers published in international journals, not just Romanian journals; but these circumstances would not pertain in the US or Canada. Similarly, Australian and New Zealand universities often like their academics to publish abroad because international journals are considered more competitive and prestigious, but this is most often the obverse within the US. Moreover, the rankings somewhat arbitrarily prefer broad-coverage to specialist journals, when specialist journals often have a more stringent acceptance rate, and e.g. rank journals that publish poetry and fiction as well as academic articles below those that publish no poetry and fiction, even if the academic articles in the former are scrupulously refereed. On the first point, The Pacific Historical Review, a broad historical journal, was assigned a B ranking because ERIH thought the active 'Pacific' denoted something merely regional. In other words, often there is a sense the rankers have not looked in a detailed way at the journal's contents. In addition, ranking methods from the sciences are clearly being applied in an unadapted way to the highly different circumstances of the humanities. Yet, despite these problems, and despite the inevitable omissions and simplifications of any ranking system, the discussants recognized that some scheme of quantitative assessment was inevitable, that deans and provosts desired such metrics. What the discussants desired was for journal editors to shape these metrics, to be able to give feedback on them, and to have enough of a voice in the process to feel that there are to some extent stakeholders within it. In addition, following up on Wheeler's earlier point about reification, one of the beneficial effects of journal rankings is that they do reinforce the idea of discrete rankings, and remind one that on an online database one can go from an A journal to a B journal to a C journal with two clicks of a mouse. Journal rankings may be an inevitable part of the twenty-first century academic framework, but they would be far more beneficial if editors play an active consultative role in shaping how they operate.

Submitted 5 January 2009 by Bonnie Wheeler (President, CElJ) with assistance on meeting notes by Nicholas Birns (Sec./Treas., CELJ)

1Two recent challenges in journal submissions and peer review. As far as we call tell at CELJ, there seems to be an across-the-board decline in unsolicited journal submissions from senior academics—the very people who serve on our editorial boards and who have traditionally offered our most mature scholarship. Striving youth now produce the basic submissions; shorter pieces by senior scholars increasingly appear in solicited book collections. Many journals cleverly 'push back' here by developing guest-edited or special-focus issues or forums in which senior and junior colleagues are invited to address some common strands. Good journals usually insist of blind peer review even of these submissions, though the editor's position here is especially delicate.

Peer review itself is the other matter of current concern. Some CELJ editors report that it is increasingly difficult to locate appropriate readers for peer review, in some measure because our academic culture does not reward scholars for so doing. Junior scholars report that their administrative heads advise them not to undertake peer reviews or even book reviews except for the most prestigious journals. Such work is considered 'mere service' and (often like journal editing) erased as a significant part of one's professional research or teaching. By the time such junior scholars become senior, they have been acculturated out of this crucial professional process of peer review though they themselves have often benefitted from it. Here, again, our professional associations must aid us if we are to retain the integrity of peer review, which is our most generous vocational work.

02.10.09: Read the new CELJ blog

Academic Journals are in the course of rethinking their management, methods, and publication standards. This year saw major panels at the AHA (American Historical Association) and MLA (Modern Language association), largely through the leadership of the Council of Editors of Learned Journals. If they face this transition with courage and ingenuity, journals have the opportunity to plant themselves firmly as pillars of professional utility, scholarly collaboration, and authoritative knowledge as a public utility.

We invite you to read the new CELJ blog and join in the conversation.

01.12.09: CELJ Annual Awards Ceremony

Golden Gate Room 6, San Francisco Hilton

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for attending this session and our 2008 Annual Awards ceremony. As Vice President of CELJ, it is my privilege to announce the winners of this year's competition in five editorial categories.

Before I announce the 2008 award winners, the Executive Committee of the CELJ would like to recognize the judges of this year's competition. We rely on the judges' insights and discernment, their professional expertise and deft experience. If present, please feel free to stand as I call your name, and receive the deep appreciation of the entire CELJ membership. The 2008 international team of judges were, in alphabetical order:

Thomas Beebee, Pennsylvania State University
Marshall Brown, University of Washington-Seattle
Christy Desmet, University of Georgia
Margery Fee, University of British Columbia
Sujata Iyengar, University of Georgia
William A. Johnsen, Michigan State University
Annemarie Jutel, School of Midwifery at the Otago Polytechnic, New Zealand
Cindi Katz, City University of New York
Nancy Miller, Columbia University
Tom Radko, Journal of Scholarly Publishing Series Editor for Transaction Publishers
Carolyn D. Roark, Editor of Ecumenica
Peter Stitt, Editor of The Gettysburg Review at Gettysburg College
Christine L. Sundt, Editor, Visual Resources: An International Journal of Documentation
and Joe Weixlmann, Provost, Saint Louis University. Please give our judges a round of applause.

Now let me present the first award of the afternoon. The 2008 award for Best Journal Design goes to the online journal Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy. Accepting the award for Kairos is its Editor, Dr. Cheryl E. Ball, Assistant Professor of New Media at Illinois State University. In praising Kairos, one judge said:

[T]he opportune moment... has come to use the word "awesome." It's a fitting descriptor for the third Kairos design [which] is one of the best I've seen: it's thoughtful, it reflects the on-going possibilities of the Web, it's painlessly accessible, and it skillfully encourages the browser to play [and] explore.... Kairos truly values design as an integral element, and the staff's hard work steering the evolution of that design over the past 12 years... has paid off handsomely.

Congratulations to you, Cheryl, and to all involved in the production of Kairos!

Our second award is for the Best New Journal; it is presented this year to Community Literacy Journal. Accepting the award are the Co-editors of Community Literacy Journal, Michael R. Moore of Michigan Technological University and John Warnock of the University of Arizona. One judge expressed admiration for the "far reaching" scope and "visually pleasing" design of Community Literacy Journal as well as "its democratic approach to literacy studies." About its focus on the "important but under-rated aspect of literacy studies," the judges found that Community Literacy Journal makes an original contribution using a compelling presentation. "Its articles elegantly integrate insights from non-academic and academic authors. Its ethos is clear and wide-ranging." The judges also extolled "the interdisciplinary nature of [Community Literacy Journal], and its willingness to embrace different scholarly disciplines." Finally, the judges remarked CLJ's fearless reach beyond "the usual boundaries of academia to topics of interest ... out in the wider world." Congratulations, Michael and John!

The 2008 Phoenix Award for Significant Editorial Achievement is presented to English Language Notes. Representing English Language Notes today is its Managing Editor, Karen Jacobs. The Phoenix Award honors the labor involved in the rejuvenation of an established periodical as well as the revitalized product that emerges from that labor. In delivering their unanimous decision for this year's selection, the judges' notes were succinct and emphatic in their choice of English Language Notes, writing: "We feel that this journal has been significantly improved, indeed transformed—inside and out. The journal is ready for the 21st Century." Congratulations to you, Karen, and to all involved in breathing new life into ELN!

Each year, the most competitive, perhaps most coveted CELJ award might well be the Best Special Issue Award. This year, rising to the top of a stack of nearly 30 entries for this prize was positions: war capital trauma, edited by Tani Barlow of Rice University. Accepting the award in Dr Barlow's absence is Jocelyn Dawson, Institutional Exhibits and Direct Marketing Coordinator for Duke University Press. In praising this special issue, one judge wrote:

The theme of trauma has been with us for [years], but this special issue expands it both geographically, with essays that address a number of Asian cultures, and also conceptually, by linking [to trauma] the idea of capital—symbolically placed between war and trauma in the issue's title....This is also an issue that many readers will enjoy cover-to-cover, due both to its coherence and comprehensiveness, [as well as] to the intriguing ... images found in its pages.

All of the judges praised the issue for openly addressing "the cliché of trauma," and moving well beyond the journal's usual focus on "'East Asian Cultural Critique' to offer a discussion readily transposable to other sites." Congratulations to the editors and contributors of this special issue of positions!

The final 2008 award is the Distinguished Editor Award, presented this year to Ronald Bayor, who in 1981, founded the Journal of American Ethnic History. Accepting the award for Dr Bayor is his colleague at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Dr Nihad Farooq. The judges were unanimous in selecting Professor Bayor, commending him for editorial work that "defined the field [of Ethnic History] generously and broadly, and provided scholars working in areas often neglected by other journals with a publication venue." The judges honor Dr Bayor for his loyal and inspired leadership of the Journal of American Ethnic History; during those 17 years, he "led a major scholarly effort to define, clarify, and analyze the most important issues in ethnic history broadly defined"—and during that time, "the quality, scope, and vision of the publication have significantly evolved. His achievements not only show a profound commitment to the disciplines of history and US ethnic studies, but also an incredible commitment to service in the profession more generally." Thank you, Dr Farooq, for accepting this honor in Ron Bayor's stead tonight. Please convey our warmest congratulations to him when you return to Georgia!

10.13.08: CELJ Statement on Special Issues

Special issues are an essential component in the life of learned journals. Special issues are, in essence, a scholarly anthology of essays on a thematic topic. They are not far different from an edited book. Special issues of journals should thus should not be seen as counting less than an edited book in circumstances of faculty assessment, tenure and promotion. The scholars who give of their time, energy, and wisdom to assemble special issues of journals should receive appropriate recognition from peers and institutions alike.

Special issues expand the scope of the journal beyond its usual range, into focused themes and genres. They crystallize research on a new or emerging methodological approach in the field. They spotlight a newly salient biographical figure or textual archive. They are springboards for scholars of a new generation with fresh approaches to make a more concerted impression on their specialization. They reflect on broad themes and thus are useful to disciplines beyond the journal's usual audience. By departing from the usual framework offered by the journal, the special issue renews its history and mission and occasions fresh reflections on the direction, thereby giving ballast to the future success of the journal.

Very often, scholars not formally affiliated with the journal are invited to coordinate submissions, or scholars may come to the editor with suggestions on a special issue topic. These Guest Editors circulate a call for papers, contact leading and promising scholars in the field for possible submissions, select from among the submissions generated to reap a proposed set of articles, and pass those articles on to the journal's Editor or Editorial Board.

Importantly, the Guest Editor does not 'replace' the existing Editor or Editorial Board for that issue. The Editor or Editorial Board has the final accountability for the ultimate product. If the Guest Editor does not follow a formal referee process, with the articles vetted by outside readers, the Editor or Editorial Board may put the articles through this process if such is the normal practice of the journal. The Editor also retains an overall fiduciary responsibility for the journal's cover art, typography, layout, printing, distribution, and the standards of its contents.

Pieces may be solicited from specific scholars for the special issue. However, solicitation of such pieces is not a guarantee of acceptance. The solicited submission must go through the normal refereeing process if such is the journal's normal practice. The solicitation is a sign of respect and an expression of hope that this author's piece can make its way into the issue as finally published. But this is not an assured outcome.

There can be a variety of approaches in how the final content of the special issue is determined. Often, only the Editor or Editorial Board has the final power to accept or reject an essay, no matter how enthusiastically it may have been welcomed by the Guest Editor. In other circumstances, Guest Editors may have substantive input on acceptance or rejection of an article. In other words, the relationship between Editor and Guest Editor can range along a spectrum from close collaboration between Editor and Guest Editor to the Guest Editor having a great deal of autonomy in soliciting, reviewing, and selecting the manuscripts. The to-and-fro between an Editor and a Guest Editor can thus be rich, multiple, and can catalyze the intellectual atmosphere surrounding the journal. However, the ground rules for who has what responsibility in the process should be decided well in advance.

In addition, the referee process, already subject to delays in processing, assessment, and revision, can be further delayed by the Editor's consultations with the Guest Editor and invited authors. People involved in special issues should be aware of time-related factors and are advised to be sure to prepare far in advance for deadlines and other contingencies.

The mission of the Guest Editor therefore is primarily scholarly. The Guest Editor does not, for instance, do line editing or sub-editing. In other words, the Editor is still heavily involved as would occur in a normal issue, the difference being that the Guest Editor has sculpted the shape of the issue. The cross-fertilization of this process is one of the primary benefits that the academic conversation can reap from the production of special issues.

This cross-fertilization has more potential than ever to affect intellectual life in the digital era. The special issue now has a logistical advantage over an edited book in that, because of the lower production costs and easier electronic distribution of journals, the content can be distributed more quickly and on more multiple platforms than edited books. Thus the traditional hierarchy of book collection over journal special issue may be upended by the potential of the special issue to reach a wider audience more rapidly and to make waves within the intellectual field as much as possible. This, in turn, calls for greater institutional credit to be given to the editors, editorial boards, Guest Editors, and contributors involved in making a special issue come out right.

12.22.08: MLA, Display Copies of Journals

If you wish to display your journal at our booth at MLA, please send three copies per journal to

Judy Boe
1608 Cedar St.
Berkeley, CA
94703
USA

All packages should be plainly marked CELJ-MLA. Please send them first-class, media mail, or parcel post; in other words, do not use delivery confirmation or signature confirmation services.  Given the Christmas rush, I would post everything within a week if you are outside the US or Canada, within two weeks if you are inside the US or Canada.

The three copies can be three different issues, or three copies of the same issue.

Publishers with a single membership in CELJ may send more than one journal, but please do not send too many.

Display copies cannot be returned by mail; they can be reclaimed in person on December 30th, or alternately they will just be given away.

Please do not hesitate to take advantage of this service; the extra booth space this dispaly requires is your dues at work.