Editor's Page

This month, I describe two "topic clusters" in the April JOE and then explain why it sometimes takes a bit of time for JOE authors to hear from me about their new submissions or revisions.

April 2003 JOE

Two topic clusters distinguish this issue of JOE (as do the other great articles, of course).

Three articles deal in one way or another with pesticides and Integrated Pest Management (IPM).

See:

• Pesticide Use Changes in New York Vegetables: 1978 to 1998
• An Assessment of Consumer Preferences for IPM- and Organically Grown Produce
• An Interactive Survey to Assess Consumer Knowledge About Landscape Plant Health Care and IPM Practices

And see them even if you are not involved in what we at Purdue call "Agriculture and Natural Resources." Those involved in other Extension program areas can learn a thing or two, as well.

Even more notably, six articles deal explicitly or implicitly with forming partnerships, either within Extension or between Extension and outside organizations.

See:

• Transformative Learning in Extension Staff Partnerships: Facilitating Personal, Joint, and Organizational Change
• Multi-Tiered, Multi-Disciplinary Work Teams--The CSU CAFO Work Group Tackles Controversial Public Issues
• An Organizational Culture Assessment Using the Competing Values Framework: A Profile of Ohio State University Extension
• Productive Partnerships for Food: Principles and Strategies
• Implementing a 4-H Aquatic Resources Education Program in New York City Through Collaborations
• Collaborations for the Community: The Partnership of Extension and Pharmacy

And the issue of partnership and collaboration, of course, crosses all Extension program areas.

Hearing About JOE Submissions & Revisions

The first thing JOE authors might like to know is that, essentially, I'm "it" on the editorial side. That is, aside from some inestimably valuable help I get from a colleague who maintains our submission tracking database, I perform all of the editorial tasks associated with JOE.

This means, among other things, that six times a year my attention and energy are pretty well consumed by "putting together" each issue and copy editing and formatting all of the articles so that they go to Robyn Ness, JOE Web developer, in decent shape for posting. Thus, if you've sent me a new submission or a revision around "issue time," you may not hear from me about its suitability for blind review or publication for several weeks.

Don't worry, though, I date submissions and revisions according to when they were sent, not when I have the opportunity to review them. In other words, you won't "lose any time" thereby.

The longest lag time between submission and hearing from me about it occurs from mid-December through mid-January, because the December issue is followed by the holidays. However, at other times in the year I might be traveling for professional reasons associated with JOE or with my Purdue position and so be unable to respond as quickly as you or I would like.

Please do not let my schedule influence when you send submissions or revisions. The progress of a submission through the review system is pretty much driven by the date it was submitted. But please understand if you do not hear from me within the week (my "ideal" time).

That having been said, let me also say that, if you have not heard from me within, say, 4 weeks of having sent a new submission or a revision, please contact me. What you sent may have "gone astray in the ether," or I may have simply but regrettably lost sight of it in the welter of e-mail I receive.

Laura Hoelscher, Editor
joe-ed@joe.org