Important Changes to JOE Submission Guidelines

Important Changes to JOE Submission Guidelines

And they are important.

Searching for and Citing JOE Articles

Last year, I wrote "What's Wrong with Skimpy References Sections?" for my August 2007 Editor's Page. An avenue I suggested to help authors participate more fully in the "scholarly dialogue" was using the JOE search site to find relevant articles.

It was a pretty good suggestion, but one that not all authors followed--or follow.

So it's not a suggestion anymore. In the "References" section of the JOE Submission Guidelines, you now see the following sentence: "Authors are expected to use the JOE search site to locate and cite all relevant JOE articles in their articles."

Besides the (I trust) persuasive reasons I outlined last August, citing JOE articles is a courtesy to JOE and to your fellow authors. And it's a courtesy to your readers, too. Cited JOE articles are readily accessible through the URLs included in the References sections, making it easier for readers to pursue topics that seize their interest.

Keywords Wanted

JOE's search site is quite good, but we're now taking steps to make it even better and to make JOE articles even more accessible.

The other new addition to the guidelines is a "Keyword List" section telling authors to provide a list of no more than five keywords or key phrases that will be the search terms that will be used to find your article through search engines.

The effect of this enhancement won't be felt immediately. We have many articles on hand that were written, reviewed, revised, and accepted for publication before our new requirement went into effect. But we're looking forward to it.

To hasten its coming, corresponding authors who have an article that has already been accepted for publication in JOE but that has not yet been published can send me a list of no more than five keywords or key phrases--along with the article's submission number and article category--and I will add that list to the article. It has to be the corresponding author, and I need the submission number and category so that I can locate the article.

If you are the corresponding author of an article that has been accepted but not yet published, this an offer you shouldn't refuse.

August JOE

The submission guidelines say that a Commentary should "offer a challenge or present a thought-provoking opinion on an issue of concern to U.S. Cooperative Extension" and "initiate discussion or debate." This issue's Commentary, "Interacting with Your Gay and Lesbian Colleague," more than fulfills those criteria. Read it, and respond in the Discussion Forum if you have opinions and insights to share with your colleagues.

The June issue of JOE featured many articles on technology-mediated ways of improving our professional lives and reaching our audiences. But it didn't deplete our store of articles on this broad and important topic. The August issue includes "Essential Components for Successful Virtual Learning Communities," the second of a three-part series on virtual communities of practice, and "Back to the Future Part 2: Surveying Geospatial Technology Needs of Georgia Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension Professionals."

Most of the Features in this issue address the Extension system in one way or another. There are articles on budgetary shortfalls, alternative revenue streams, travel and work experiences of women in Extension, managing performance, teamwork, and new agent training. A rich mix.

And I call your attention, as well, to the first two Tools of the Trade articles, "Taking Program Snapshots: Planning Strategies When There Isn't Time for Strategic Planning" and "Promotion, Tenure, and Merit-Based Pay: 15 Keys to Success." Talk about useful.

The only reason I don't call your particular attention to the other fine articles in this issue is that I've run out of time and space.

Laura Hoelscher, Editor
joe-ed@joe.org