Annual report to the readership September 2002.Dear Readers: As I complete the first year of my term as editor of LDQ LDQ Learning Disabilities Quarterly LDQ Laboratory Data Quality LDQ Local Delivery Queue LDQ Load Quadword LDQ Load Queue I am initiating an annual report to the readership read·er·ship n. 1. The readers of a publication considered as a group. 2. Chiefly British The office of a reader at a university. . The purpose of this communication is to provide CLD CLD Called CLD Cloud CLD Cleared CLD Chronic Lung Disease CLD Council for Learning Disabilities CLD Cooled CLD Chronic Liver Disease CLD Clear Direction Flag CLD Certified LabVIEW Developer CLD Causal Loop Diagram members and LDQ readers with a public accounting of the many activities associated with management of the journal. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS See About this product. The work of publishing a professional journal involves the cooperation, skill, and coordinated efforts of many individuals. I'd I'd 1. Contraction of I had. 2. Contraction of I would. I'd I had or I would I'd have ~would like to take this opportunity to recognize the efforts of the many individuals associated with LDQ with whom I have the privilege of working on a regular basis. Transition My sincere appreciation to past editor Bernice Bernice is a surname and a given name. Bernice may refer to:
adj. 1. Characterized by kindness and warm courtesy. 2. Characterized by tact and propriety: responded to the insult with gracious humor. 3. and thoughtful advice and assistance in the transition process. Records, manuscript manuscript, a handwritten work as distinguished from printing. The oldest manuscripts, those found in Egyptian tombs, were written on papyrus; the earliest dates from c.3500 B.C. files, and databases were transferred to the Milwaukee Milwaukee (mĭlwŏk`ē), city (1990 pop. 628,088), seat of Milwaukee co., SE Wis., at the point where the Milwaukee, Menominee, and Kinnickinnic rivers enter Lake Michigan; inc. 1846. office in the summer of 2001. I will strive to maintain the standard of excellence Dr. Wong established during her term as LDQ editor. Editorial Board Many thanks to each of the reviewers who accepted my invitation to serve on the editorial board (see the list on the inside cover of the journal). Their timely, thoughtful, and thorough reviews are a critical factor in the ability of the journal to publish relevant high-quality research on learning disabilities. CLD Leadership Judy Judy is most commonly a female given name, as well as a shorten form of Judith. It may also refer to:
The earliest stage of a new business venture. period. In addition, Kirsten McBride, CLD executive director, has been a wonderful source of information, inspiration, encouragement, and timely assistance in all facets of the day-to-day operations of the journal. It is a pleasure to work with you, Kirsten! BENCHMARKING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS To ensure the professional management of LDQ, I have outlined goals and benchmark performance standards and created internal systems that enable us to collect ongoing performance data and periodically report on the results of our efforts. In this section I profile our performance in selected areas for the first 12 months in office. Status of Pre-2002 Manuscripts All manuscripts submitted to Dr. Bernice Wong have been acted upon and the files closed. Remaining manuscripts accepted under Dr. Wong's tenure have been published in Volume 25. Acceptance Rate The acceptance rate for LDQ the past year was 44%. While acceptance rates will fluctuate, it is possible to calculate a target acceptance figure. For example, given the need to feature approximately five articles in each of four issues annually requires acceptance of 20 manuscripts each year. If approximately 50 manuscripts are submitted, acceptance of 20 manuscripts would yield a 40% acceptance rate. As a result, it can be expected that LDQ will accept 3-4 out of 10 manuscripts for publication. Status of Manuscripts (July 1, 2001-June 30, 2002) The following list summarizes the status of manuscripts received during my first year as editor:
n %
Rejected on screening 1 4%
Withdrawn 1 4%
Under review 7 28%
Rejected after review 5 20%
Accepted 11 44%
Total 25 100%
Processing Timelines This article or section contains self-references. For other uses of "Timeline", see Timeline (disambiguation). The following is an index of timelines found on Wikipedia. Since authors seeking to publish research on learning disabilities have a choice among a number of prominent journals, it is important that LDQ distinguish itself as a premier publication outlet. Toward this end, I am pleased to announce the following performance benchmarks for processing and publishing manuscripts: * Receipt of a manuscript will be acknowledged within two weeks of the date the author mailed the manuscript to our office. * Manuscripts will be sent for review within four weeks after receipt. * Editorial decisions will be made within 16 weeks after receipt. * Publication will occur within eight months following final revisions (within one year of submission). Acknowledgment acknowledgment, in law, formal declaration or admission by a person who executed an instrument (e.g., a will or a deed) that the instrument is his. The acknowledgment is made before a court, a notary public, or any other authorized person. of Receipt Benchmark Goal % met Mean Range Acknowledgment sent 14 days 68% 8 days 1-45 days (accepted for review) (4 > 28 days) These data illustrate that we are somewhat successful in meeting the benchmark. However, more must be done to ensure that acknowledgments are routinely and immediately sent. This initial point of contact is important for establishing a relationship with our authors and reduces authors' anxiety about whether or not we received their manuscript, especially international submissions. Manuscripts Sent for Review
Benchmark Goal % met Mean Range
MS sent for review 30 days 58% 31 days 3-80 days
(4 > 60 days)
These data suggest that our processing procedures can benefit from closer monitoring of this benchmark and the addition of more reviewers on the editorial board. Underperformance in this area is primarily due to delays during the initial six months as the editorial board was being reorganized re·or·gan·ize v. re·or·gan·ized, re·or·gan·iz·ing, re·or·gan·iz·es v.tr. To organize again or anew. v.intr. To undergo or effect changes in organization. . Editorial Decisions Benchmark Goal % met Mean Range Decision on MS 112 days 55% 88 (7-168 days) Two factors primarily impact performance in this area: whether or not reviews are returned on time and timely review by the editor. Underperformance in this area is due to the cumulative delays in start-up (27% on-time decisions in the first six months vs. 100% on-time decisions in the second six months). Publication Within a Year of Submission Benchmark Goal % met Publication within one year of submission 12 months 100% LDQ does not have a backlog Backlog The total value of sales orders waiting to be fulfilled. Notes: This figure is used mainly in the manufacturing industry. Increases or decreases in a company's backlog indicate the future direction of sales and earnings. of manuscripts pending publication. As a result, we are currently working with less than one issue of manuscripts in production. In practical terms, this means that CLD should actively communicate with potential authors concerning our commitment and ability to publish manuscripts within a year of submission. Summary While we have made important strides toward implementing and monitoring a performance-based system for managing the journal, I believe we must be diligent dil·i·gent adj. Marked by persevering, painstaking effort. See Synonyms at busy. [Middle English, from Old French, from Latin d about the challenges of publishing timely and relevant research. In summary, I hope the information presented here communicates the viability of LDQ as a premier publication for prospective authors seeking to disseminate dis·sem·i·nate v. dis·sem·i·nat·ed, dis·sem·i·nat·ing, dis·sem·i·nates v.tr. 1. To scatter widely, as in sowing seed. 2. learning disabilities research and provides readers with insight about the current management practices associated with LDQ. CALL FOR MANUSCRIPTS In order for LDQ to publish high-quality research articles, we require a steady flow of high-quality manuscripts. As you, your colleagues, and your students consider possible publication outlets for disseminating dis·sem·i·nate v. dis·sem·i·nat·ed, dis·sem·i·nat·ing, dis·sem·i·nates v.tr. 1. To scatter widely, as in sowing seed. 2. your scholarly work, I personally invite you to consider the Learning Disability Quarterly. Additional information about submission procedures and manuscript preparation may be found on the Council of Learning Disability (CLD) website (www.cldinternational.org), by clicking on the LDQ button. FUTURE DIRECTIONS As I prepare this report, we have completed work on a database of LDQ articles published since 1998. While our ultimate goal is to have a bibliographic database For computer programs to manage an individual's bibliographic references, see Reference management software A bibliographic or library database is a database of bibliographic information. of the citations of all articles that have appeared in the first 25 years of LDQ, our initial efforts have been completed for the years 1998-2001. Watch for additional information on the CLD website concerning the availability of searchable bibliographies and databases. In Closing I am pleased to submit this report to the readership and hope that it clarifies the directions I have established for the journal. While I have noted specific areas that still need improvement, I am pleased with our progress to date. I welcome your feedback, comments, criticisms, suggestions, and--of course--manuscripts! Dave L. Edyburn, Editor, LDQ Department of Exceptional Education Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee 610 Enderis Hall, 2400 E. Hartford Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53201 email: ldq@uwm.edu, phone: 414/229-5260 |
|
||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion