 |
June 2014
|
June 2014 // Volume 52 // Number 3 // Editorial // v52-3ed1
JOE Peer Reviewers
Abstract
In "JOE Peer Reviewers," I discuss just what the title suggests, our current roster of expert JOE reviewers, and issue an invitation to consider joining their ranks. In "June JOE," I call attention to the three Commentaries, including the third Commentary JOE is publishing this year to commemorate the Smith-Lever Act Centennial, and to two more articles on climate change and three on social media.
JOE Peer Reviewers
Recently, a few authors submitting articles to the Journal of Extension (JOE) have been including lists of suggested reviewers. Not necessary.
JOE has a standing committee of expert reviewers representing the many disciplines of Extension. Our peer reviewers have been carefully vetted by three members of the JOE Board Editorial Committee and have met the strict criteria we've established. They know their "stuff," they know Extension, they've got scholarly publishing experience, and they have high standards. To see a list of JOE reviewers, click on "Current JOE Reviewers," on the right of the JOE homepage. For a brief explanation of our review process, see The JOE Review Process.
So the JOE reviewers we have are great, but we always want more. If you think you might be interested in becoming a JOE reviewer, visit JOE FAQ #10.
There are many benefits to becoming a reviewer for JOE. Reviewers have commented that the experience helps them improve their own scholarly writing and that it helps them keep abreast of what's happening in Extension. Reviewing is certainly a help to others. "Firm but fair," detailed reviews are real contributions to the professional development of Extension colleagues and thus to Extension. And being able to claim that you are a JOE reviewer would certainly be a valuable addition to your curriculum vitae or resume.
Think about it.
June JOE
The third Commentary JOE is publishing this year to commemorate the Smith-Lever Act Centennial is "Family & Consumer Sciences and Cooperative Extension in a Diverse World." <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/comm1.php>There are two other Commentaries in the issue, "Economic Activity Analyses: The Need for Consensus" <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/comm2.php> and "Thinking Collectively: Using a Food Systems Approach to Improve Public Health." <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/comm3.php> The latter article complements a Feature in the April issue, "A Food Policy Council Guide for Extension Professionals," <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014april/a6.php> by the same authors.
You'll notice in all three Commentaries a statement we're now including at the top of every Commentary: "Commentaries conform to JOE submission standards and provide an opportunity for Extension professionals to exchange perspectives and ideas." This is a further effort to distinguish Commentaries from other categories of JOE articles, something I discussed in "Some Words About Commentaries," <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014april/ed1.php> from my April Editor's Page.
We also have two more articles on climate change: "Forestry Professionals and Extension Educators vs. Climate Change: Implications for Cooperative Extension Programming" <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/a1.php> and "Agricultural Producer Perceptions of Climate Change and Climate Education Needs for the Central Great Plains." <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/a2.php>
And there are several articles on social media in the June issue, starting with "Expanding the Reach of Extension Through Social Media." <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/a3.php> Rounding out a social-media trio are "To Like or Not to Like: Social Media as a Marketing Tool" <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/iw1.php> and "Using Twitter to Deliver 4-H Show Announcements." <http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/tt1.php>
The 28 other articles in this June issue are also well worth reading, of course!