December 2002 // Volume 40 // Number 6
 |
 |
Editor's Page
Abstract
This month, I invite interested and qualified readers to help JOE and
their colleagues by applying to become JOE peer reviewers. And I also
talk about the three pairs of articles in the December issue that speak to each
other as well as to us.
Becoming a JOE Reviewer
Are you an author who has waited too long for your review results from JOE? You're not in the majority, but you're not alone, either. If you want to help, consider applying to become a JOE peer reviewer.
Having invited you to apply, let me also warn you that we're picky. We have high standards for our reviewers. JOE peer reviewers must:
- Exhibit broad subject area expertise,
- Have published in JOE or otherwise demonstrated Extension/outreach scholarship,
- Demonstrate excellent English grammar and writing skills,
- Be an active Extension professional or retired but still active/current in Extension,
- Show interest in and commitment to JOE, and
- Have digital access (e-mail, Internet, fax) to facilitate the review process.
JOE reviewers are appointed for 3-year terms (renewable once) and review approximately 12 submissions per year (something they're expected to do in a timely manner). You can find more information about being a reviewer at the "For Reviewers" page of the JOE site.
If I haven't scared you off (and I hope I haven't), please submit your C.V. electronically to Diane Brown, the JOE Editorial Committee Chair, at dvb1@psu.edu. Include the name and e-mail address of a reference who can speak to your ability to serve as a reviewer.
The Editorial Committee Chair, the Peer Reviewer Representative, and the Editor serve as the committee to select JOE reviewers. We'll make our selections based on the degree to which candidates meet the criteria above and on balance in terms of subject-matter expertise and geographical representation. If we don't select you this time, you may be hearing from JOE in the future.
Again, if you're interested in helping JOE and helping your colleagues, please submit your C.V. and the name and e-mail address of a reference to Diane Brown at dvb1@psu.edu.
We could use your help.
December 2002 JOE
Three pairs of articles in this issue speak to each other as well as to us.
What the first Feature in the December roster, "Using Research Methods to Evaluate Your Extension Program," and the first Research in Brief, "Communicating the Handling of Nonresponse Error in Journal of Extension Research in Brief Articles," is obvious by their titles. They both deal with research methods and research rigor, with which all Extension and outreach professionals should be concerned.
Two other Research in Brief articles, "Measuring the Ethical Cognition Effects of a Videotape Livestock Show Ethics Education Program" and "Electronic Identification of 4-H Livestock Projects," deal with ethics and livestock shows, one very explicitly.
And two Tools of the Trade articles, "Tips for Teaching Non-Traditional Audiences" and "Engaging Minority and Culturally Diverse Audiences," are reports from "the field" of lessons learned through experience in reaching diverse audiences. There's some overlap, which is as it should be, and both add to our growing knowledge base in this very important area.
Laura Hoelscher, Editor
joe-ed@joe.org