Hitting the ground running: Maximizing your early years in academia (NASP 2019 Handout)

Access the handout here.Session: Sullivan, A. L., Harris, B., & Gadke, D. (2019, February). Hitting the ground running: Maximizing your early years in academia. Special session at the annual convention of the National Association of School Psychologists, Atlanta, GA.Description: This symposium provided an overview of strategies for success for prospective and new faculty.

Hunkering Down to Boost Writing Productivity

I am not, nor do I ever anticipate being, one of those people who can or will write every day. As someone who reads (and occasionally writes) on faculty and early career development, and who follows many related listservs and groups, I realize this is regarded as heresy by some, and by their more forgiving acolytes, as an unfortunate and career-stifling dysfunction. Although I certainly appreciate others who’ve called out the performative misery of daily predawn writing and suggested more practical alternatives for daily writing, it just doesn’t work for me. The truth is, I write in large blocks—indeed, the largest uninterrupted blocks I can feasibly manage given the constraints of my energy (read: caffeination), attention span, and competing demands (advising, administration, parenthood, self-care, and so on). This is habitual. I wrote much of my dissertation during a two-week self-imposed sequestration in a dark cubicle in the back of windowless, musty office most other grad students avoided. This would set my habit for the next 15 years, though I can avail myself of much nicer spaces now. When the Minnesota weather allows, students and colleagues know they can often find me on our building’s rooftop deck, feet propped up, earbuds in, wifi off (i.e., no email), and very happily writing with only the occasional eagle overhead to distract me.During the academic year, I write once, maybe twice, a week, though more so in the summer if I strategize appropriately. During some weeks-long stretches of the academic year, I might not write at all, but my research agenda is sustained through meetings with colleagues and students to move emergent or in progress projects forward. This is especially true at the end of the spring semester when advising and administrative duties are heaviest. Since assuming the role of program director, I’ve found concentrated group writing time, what we here have called writing hunkers, to be particularly helpful in shifting back into writing mode and making substantial progress on stalled writing projects. For the past few years, our program has offered at least one hunker per summer for students with faculty leads and participants.What are writing hunkers? Simply, these are concentrated writing days dedicated to the process of preparing manuscripts. All students and faculty are invited, with advanced notice that the ideal hunker project is one for which data collection, analyses, and much of the background reading are done. Writers are encouraged to focus on a single project rather than toggling between multiple ones, and to focus on manuscripts rather than ancillary research products (e.g., presentations, materials, briefs). Generally, our hunkers are scheduled for four consecutive days of 6 to 7 hour blocks. This works well during the summer or other breaks, but regularly scheduled day-long or half-day hunkers throughout the semester or summer can also provide comparable opportunity and support. Sample schedules are provided here.During our hunkers, writers are instructed to plan to be engaged for the full time each day. We try to prevent distractions and other things that might take time away from writing by provide refreshments (coffee, snacks, lunch), reference books, ear plugs, and posted lists of what to do if stumbling upon a writing block. Whenever possible, we arrange for space outside of the building in which our offices and lab space is housed to minimize the likelihood of interruptions. That is, students and faculty alike recognized that if we were easy to find (and basically stationary for the duration of the hunker), it would be all too easy for well-meaning colleagues and students to drop by to ask questions or pull us into friendly chats during breaks, and that this would ultimately undermine our goals for the hunker. We’ve also been fortunate to reserve spaces that allow for each writer to organize their personal worktop to their needs. Some people want to work facing the corner or wall with earplugs in, others facing out the window with music flowing through earbuds. Still others might want to work face to face, the typist across the table spurring dedication to task. Individual tables allow each writer to spread as much or as little paper and books as they like without being concerned about intruding on others’ space.We generally follow the 4-day schedule here. On day one, we set group norms and individual goals, usually using the following form that will anchor each day’s work. Outside of the lunch discussions and afternoon consultation time, the expectation is that everyone will work quietly, avoid internet distractions, and only work on the specified goals. The presence of others creates accountability even though our interactions are limited. If nothing else, no one wants to be caught web surfing by a fellow writer. Each writer takes breaks as needed though, and some use task and time management tools (e.g., pomodoro technique and corresponding apps). At the end of the day we debrief, celebrating progress and troubleshooting challenges.The lunch discussions provide much needed interaction and downtime. Discussion topics are tailored to the needs and preferences of each unique group. Past topics at our hunkers have included general writing strategies, journal selection, peer review process, responding to reviewer feedback, handling rejection, getting over writer’s block, tailoring writing for specific audiences, and effective data presentation. Sometimes we also avail ourselves of various university resources, such as writing consultants who can provide feedback on style and mechanics or lead seminars on dealing with writing blocks. Other great options are inviting speakers from the IRB office or subject librarians to help develop reference skills and research consumerism.I love these writing hunkers and I am consistently pleased with the progress I make. Sure, most of us are wrung out by the end of the day since we’re largely unaccustomed to this intensity of work. Yet it’s also incredibly gratifying. Progress is reinforcing, as is the sense of being in a community of writers. I appreciate that the hunkers provide a space for students and faculty from throughout the program to discuss the writing process and its challenges, publication process, and developing productive writing habits. A common conversation is how to adapt the tools and approaches used in the hunker to our own continued writing practice, both for daily writers and others like me. The warmups and parking downhill exercises are especially valuable to writers of all types because they can be applied by both daily and intermittent writers to support quick transitions back into a writing project after time away. Though I am admittedly not a daily writer, I also appreciate the opportunity to talk openly with students about developing effective writing habits--whatever that means for them--with practice in application of strategies and tools during the hunker and beyond.Do you have ideas to share or questions about how to use writing hunkers to boost your productivity? Comment below or join us for a live chat November 29, 2018 at 1 pm PST/ 3pm CST/ 4pm EST. Sign up here for the chat.

Manuscript Rejected: Moving Onward and Upward

January 25, 2018

Laura Pendergast, Temple University“Are you done?” my mentor asked patiently. My beautiful manuscript had been rejected… again. My mentor had been listening to me complain for 15 minutes. I was starting a tenure-track position and needed to publish. I had conducted my analyses using the most current statistical techniques. I had painstakingly crafted my arguments and drawn careful, well-supported conclusions. Why didn’t these reviewers understand my paper?!My mentor looked at me calmly and shared a hard truth that changed the way I thought about my writing. She said, “The editor chose three reviewers who he viewed as trusted experts. These hand-picked experts didn’t understand your paper. If multiple, highly educated people didn’t understand what you wrote, whose fault is that?”She was right. Publishing manuscripts is not just about being technically correct and scientifically sound. It is about communicating with an audience. How is your manuscript useful to the readers? How can other researchers build on this information? How does your manuscript advance the field? I reviewed the comments carefully. Once I worked through my emotional reaction, I realized how useful the reviews were. I thought about how best to incorporate the reviews, and I decided to start over. I began by making a new outline. I kept my original results section but rewrote the rest of the paper in a way that was clear and conveyed why the work was meaningful. The revised paper was quickly accepted at another journal.Rejection: Perspectives from Four AcademicsMost, probably all, successful academics have stories like mine. Here, I have compiled advice on handling rejection from four highly productive scholars in school psychology at different levels in their careers: Dr. Desireé Vega, Assistant Professor at the University of Arizona; Dr. Stephen Kilgus, Associate Professor at University of Missouri; Dr. Renée Tobin, Professor at Temple University; and Dr. Randy Floyd, Professor and Associate Chair at University of Memphis.All four scholars indicated that, like most academics, they have experienced rejection many times. When asked if he had experienced rejection, Dr. Kilgus noted:“Far more than I would care to admit! I have had plenty of papers rejected, including plenty that appeared to be tanked by a single reviewer (with two other reviewers expressing high opinions of the work). There are certainly also those “zombie” papers, that have been shopped to multiple journals over multiple years. Some have found a home, others continue to wander the earth…”The respondents provided a great deal of advice for early career scholars. Themes and key supporting quotes are presented below:1. Have realistic expectations. Remember that rejection is the norm. RF: Know you must be tough to navigate through the peer-review process. Check out this cartoon from Nick D. Kim (http://www.lab-initio.com/) that conveys well these challenges that authors face in publishing in the strongest journals: http://lab-initio.com/images/fullsize/nz060.jpg. My guess is that the most prolific authors in our field (and psychology as a whole) experience rejection by handling editors (e.g., associate editors and editors-in-chief) at a rate at least double (and probably three or four times) their number of published journal articles. Based on loads of evidence, such as the annual APA journal statistics and operations reports (see http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/statistics.aspx) and journal operations reports routinely published by school psychology journals like JSP (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440517300936) and SPQ (in the APA journal statistics and operations reports), your standard expectation when you submit a manuscript for publication should be rejection. Although the rates of rejection do vary substantially across journals, remember that rejection comes with the territory.2. Carefully consider when to read the feedback and how to respondDV: When I receive a rejection, I usually do not read through the comments immediately. Sometimes reviewers are harsh and unfortunately do not always provide constructive feedback, so I wait until I am in a better space to review the feedback.SK: Do not read the rejection letter right away! It’s just going to make you mad. Let the recognition of rejection be enough for the first day. The next day, once you’re a little calmer, go back and read the decision letter. Know going in that there are going to be opinions with which you vehemently disagree. Also know that there are going to be really strong suggestions that are worthy of your attention. Some of my manuscripts have become much better papers as a result of initial rejection and my (occasionally begrudging) response to reviewer feedback.(Note. All respondents agreed that lashing out or sending an emotional response to the handling editor is unwise. See Floyd (2018) for detailed examples of appropriate and inappropriate responses: https://www.routledge.com/Publishing-in-School-Psychology-and-Related-Fields-An-Insiders-Guide/Floyd/p/book/9781138645998).3. Manage your emotions and engage in self-careRF: More generally, if you engage in wellness activities on a routine basis—socializing, engaging in aerobic exercise, eating a healthy diet, enjoying mindfulness activities such as meditation, and getting plenty of sleep—rejection should be easier to face. Consider that collaborating in research and writing may also benefit you, as your co-authors can be there for you in coping with rejection, offering perspective, and problem-solving.SK: Once you have received the rejection, do not spend a lot of time coming up with arguments and counter points. That journal does not want your paper back and I have yet to hear of someone who has successfully lobbied for their rejected paper to be reconsidered by a journal. Expend your energy on revising the paper and resubmitting it to a new outlet…RT: It is easy to associate the project with the negative feelings that come with a rejection. Try not to let that linger. Get it back under review somewhere else so the negative feelings can be replaced with positive ones or at least something you can do about it (i.e., respond to the next round of reviews when you receive a revise and resubmit response).4. Think carefully and logically about your plan for revisions. DV:  After reading the feedback, I decide whether I am going to make any changes to the manuscript before I send it to another journal. There have been times where I have not made any edits to a manuscript after it has been rejected and send it off elsewhere as it is. And there have been times where I have made changes to the manuscript before sending it elsewhere. The positive side of a rejection is that at least two reviewers have taken the time to provide feedback (hopefully constructive) on your work to help you make it a stronger paper. Nonetheless, after a rejection, the decision to incorporate that feedback into your paper is ultimately up to you.SK: Once you are ready to review the rejection letter, look for comments indicating when reviewers either (a) explicitly indicated their confusion or (b) made statements or assumptions that imply such confusion. Some authors draw the unfortunate conclusion that the reviewer was not qualified to review their work. However, I try to remind myself that if a reviewer did not understand something, that is at least partially on me as the author. I need to do a better job of structuring my content and conveying my ideas.RT: Carefully construct an objective list of editor and reviewer criticisms and address them. Once you have done so, find another suitable journal and submit it. Take enough time in this process that are able to be as objective as possible, but not too long that you let this manuscript fall out of your production queue. RF: Recently, someone asked me to address reviewers’ direct or implied references to “fatal flaws” evident in manuscripts. Sometimes, reviewers are correct in identifying serious objective weaknesses in your study (e.g., very small sample size or lack of a comparison group in group designs and lack of experimental control in single-case designs). Strive to stay in the game and address them with careful reporting of study limitations or collection of additional data in order to submit the manuscript elsewhere. After facing rejection by three or four journals, you may decide that your time would be better spent abandoning that manuscript and trying to publish another stronger study. Often reviewers will offer more nebulous, subjective criticisms (e.g., “this manuscript does not contribute significantly to the literature in the area”) that are idiosyncratic when rejecting manuscripts. In these cases, give the criticisms close scrutiny and consult with a more senior colleague, an insightful peer, or even the journal’s handling editor. In most cases, careful responses to these comments and reframing of the study can, with time, lead to significant improvements in its quality and ultimate acceptance by another journal.5. Use the reviews to improve your writing. RT: Consider how you can make your manuscript clearer to avoid similar criticism. Did you spend too long getting to the main point of the article in the introduction? Were the details of your methods obscured by complex syntax? Did you omit key information assuming that the reader would have a deeper understanding of your data collection or analysis methods? Forcing yourself to generate an objective list of criticisms and then systematically addressing them helps take the sting out of rejection, makes revising more manageable, improves your product, and will ultimately lead to you finding a home for your manuscript.   6. Find the right “home” for your manuscript. DV: But the best advice I received from a senior colleague was that there is a home for your manuscript. It might not be the first, second, third, or even fourth journal that you send it to, but it will eventually find a home… After a rejection, I would suggest finding a new home for it as soon as possible!! On average, I wait no more than one month to resubmit the manuscript. This helps me maintain a steady stream of projects/manuscripts in progress and under review.RT: Early in my career, one of my colleagues noted, “Every project has a home. Your job is to find it.” Sometimes finding that home requires minimal revision and submission to another journal. Sometimes it requires a major overhaul of every section of the manuscript. Sometimes it requires that you collect additional data. Whatever it is, do not give up.RF: After time has passed, determine what you can control, and ponder ways to prevent the same decision from occurring again. Consider the manuscript that was rejected, generate strategies to address the critiques in a revision, and search diligently for a better-fitting journal (based on the structure and relative strength of articles published in that journal, the number of manuscripts submitted to it, its impact and reputation, the composition of its editorial board, etc.). More generally, file away the feedback and use it to guide your development of future studies and design of future manuscripts.7. Know the Habits of Productive ScholarsRF: Perhaps the best, most data-driven article on the topic of being productive as a scholar was developed by Rebecca Martinez for a special issue of JSP published in 2011. This article is “Strategies And Attributes Of Highly Productive Scholars And Contributors To The School Psychology Literature: Recommendations For Increasing Scholarly Productivity” (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022440511000835). Personally, I re-read it from time to time. A key finding was that the most productive scholars take peer reviews seriously, address revisions thoroughly, and learn from constructive feedback. Specific strategies included (a) not taking criticism and rejection personally and (b) rewriting, revising, and resubmitting without delay. Some of these scholars also suggested serving as a reviewer for journals in which you’d like to publish. Among other things, doing so gives you perspective by allowing you to see the review process from the other side of what you experience as an author. 8. Move Onward and UpwardSK: There is going to be plenty of rejection throughout your career – it’s the rule more than the exception. Of course, recognition of rejection’s commonality by no means makes it easy to take. Just do not get discouraged. Some folks end up playing it too safe and submitting their future work to lower tiered journals, just because they do not want to face tough criticism or because they do not think their work is worthy. Keep getting better at what you do and expose yourself to tough feedback. It is the only way we grow.In conclusion, rejection is part of academia. While many prefer not to talk about it, most of us experience it more than we’d like to admit. As an Associate Editor, I am often in a position where I need to recommend that a manuscript be rejected. When this happens, I always close my rejection letter to the author by noting that I have been the recipient of many rejection letters, and that I understand how disappointing the news can be – because it is true. I have received many rejection letters over the course of my career. But, while disappointing, the feedback that came with each rejection brought me one step closer to success.ReferencesFloyd, R. G. (2018). The peer-review process and responding to reviewer feedback. In R. G. Floyd (Ed.), Publishing in school psychology and related fields: An insider’s guide (pp. 45-61). New York, NY: Routledge.Martinez, R. S., Floyd, R. G., & Erichsen, L. (2011). Strategies and attributes of highly productive scholars and contributors to the school psychology literature: Recommendations for increasing scholarly productivity. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 691–720.

Preparing a Job Talk: Maximizing Your Impact During Campus Visits

December 4, 2017

by Leandra Parris, PhD, Illinois State UniversityWhether you are seeking your first academic position or hoping to find a new one, tis the season for job searches. We’ve previously addressed the job search process here and here. Soon campus visits will begin (for some programs, they are well underway) and hopeful candidates will begin to experience the dread, worry, and excitement of preparing for the marathon of meetings, meals, and presentations. It can be easy to get overwhelmed by the process, particularly since it can sometimes last up to two days. From debates about drinking during your visit to what questions are (and are not) appropriate to ask, job candidates seeking advice will get a long, mixed list of do’s and don’ts. But one thing is consistent: the job talk is one of, if not the, most important part of the campus visit. Your skills in teaching, research, and presenting your expertise will all be evaluated in this 45-60 minute talk. But don’t stress (too much). We’ve put together a list of ideas that will help you prepare for and pull off your job talk.Know What Is Expected. A search committee likely has a fairly specific idea of what they want to see in candidates’ talks and these expectations can vary from position to position depending on the nature of the institution, unit, and program. A traditional job talk may focus exclusively on detailing a single study, but it’s increasingly common for committees to ask candidates to provide insight into their research agenda or a progression of studies. Some search committees will also ask for multiple talks, such as a research talk and a teaching demonstration, and some, depending on the nature of the position (e.g., heavy teaching), may only want a teaching demonstration. Identifying the exact nature of your job talk is a vital first step to preparing a compelling talk.If the search committee doesn’t articulate their expectations, don’t be afraid to ask. You might query their expectations or goals for the presentation, how much time you should leave for questions, and how specialized versus broad your audience will be. There are numerous questions you might ask depending on the information provided: Will you be presenting only to the faculty and students of the school psychology program, or to the faculty of the entire department/college? Do faculty like handouts? Is an extensive Q&A portion expected? If that’s the case, it’s a mistake to present for the full time. Find out how long they’d actually like you to spend on the presentation portion if it’s not already clearly identified in your visit agenda. You might also ask about the type of room you can expect, since you may choose to adjust your presentation style or materials if you are in a conference room as opposed to an amphitheater for 100 or more.Be knowledgeable but clear. When it comes to presenting your research, it is easy to give too much or too little. You have spent years dedicated to this line of investigation, while the same is unlikely to be true of your audience. This can cause applicants to forget that not everyone is familiar with the terms and processes that seem so second nature. Or the applicant is very aware of the complexity of the issue at hand and glosses over details in an attempt to simplify their presentation. According to Dr. Mark Swerdlik from Illinois State University, job applicants do not always “go into enough depth in their talk [which is] tricky because [they] are also talking to some in [the] audience that are not likely familiar” with their area of research. This is also true of your teaching philosophy and the materials you may choose to include in a teaching demonstration. When you practice your talk, don’t only rely on feedback from friends or peers who know your research area well—ask friends, colleagues, or even family members, unfamiliar with the intricacies of your research who can help you identify the aspects of your presentation that may be unclear, confusing, or overly dense.The importance of explaining your research without overburdening your audience rises from one simple assumption: people who are truly experts can explain their topic area to anyone with clarity. However you choose to demonstrate your research or teaching style, make sure the format is easily understood, uses laymen’s terms whenever possible, and makes complex phenomena, philosophies, and methods appear straight forward.Teach them something. If there is not a teaching demonstration as part of the interview process, then your skills as an instructor will be inferred from your job talk. As pointed out by Dr. Tara Raines from the University of Denver, “Your job talk is a sample of your teaching style.” You may not feel like it, but you are in fact the expert in your area of interest and this your chance to share what you know with the audience. Show them that you can not only be an expert, but you can help others become experts, too. You also want them to know that you can be an effective instructor through interactions with your students, which leads to our next bit of advice.Be engaging. Don’t be afraid to be enthusiastic, according to Dr. Swerdlik. Because this is your chance to show that you are sound researcher and excellent instructor, it is important that you show that you also like doing these things. There are multiple ways to be engaging, such as quick activities related to your topic, walking the room, or simply modulating your voice to convey passion and interest (pro tip: Your speaking style shouldn’t mimic Ben Stine’s). Try not to rely on notes or slides too heavily since no one attends your job talk to watch you read. Instead, allow your slides to supplement what you are saying rather than dictating or constraining your presentation. Make eye contact with multiple people in your audience, doing your best to draw them into the presentation the same way you would try to increase nonverbal participation while teaching. Let your personality show and don’t be afraid to throw in some humor to help you relax and connect with your audience—but not too much. Humor is subjective and may be off-putting to some members of your audience.Think about when you are the most comfortable explaining your research or instructional topic and do your best to emulate that throughout your talk. This will help you be clear, knowledge, and engaging. When you practice your talk, do it as you will for the real event and ask for feedback on style of you have a volunteer audience.Be responsive. You are going to have to read your audience. If it is clear that there are multiple people who are confused, stop and ask if there are questions. If they seem to have gotten a point that you are still trying to make, move on. If they are a more serious crowd, cut the humor. This may mean being flexible, expecting the unexpected, and staying cool under pressure should someone in the audience throw you off. From technology mishaps, scheduling issues, and people walking in and out of your presentation, there can be distractions and things that throw you off your game. But stay with your audience in the moment.Connect with the program/position. According to Dr. Celeste Malone of Howard University, one of the biggest mistakes candidates make is “not describing how their research fits with the department or program.” Whether it is linking to the mission or orientation of the program or college, an extension or expansion of current research being conducted by faculty, or a complement to ongoing research within the unit, make it clear what your contribution will be to this specific program and department or school. This also shows that you have done your research about the institution and demonstrates your interest in not just getting ajob, but getting this job. That’s important to search committees and your potential future colleagues.Show them where you’re going. In addition to failing to connect with the program, Dr. Malone pointed out that some candidates don’t make it explicit “how they plan to extend their research.” While having an excellent research study to discuss is wonderful, failing to outline next steps is much like conducting an evaluation then providing no recommendations. Those looking to hire you are using your current presentation to evaluate your potential scholarly contributions, and in many places, this concerns is implicitly or explicitly tied to tenure and promotion standards. Accordingly, your research agenda should be explicitly stated. This can be especially important if the research you present is exclusively your dissertation, or alternatively, the work you did your advisor or a center – you need to make clear the potential trajectory of your research program as an independent scholar. Think about what you want your research agenda or teaching development to look like over the next five years and highlight those goals for the audience.Know your limits. We all want to be fancy with our presentations. We want to awe our audience, make them laugh with us, and leave without any doubts of our competency and likeability. But this is not the time to try out a new teaching technique, activity, or technology. Stick with what you know, what makes you comfortable, and presentation methods that do not tax your cognitive processes. You will need bit of your brain focused on your presentation, not also trying to figure out a new clicker with fancy features or how to make certain graphics work. Also, make sure that your presentation is not so fancy that it cannot easily work on both a PC and a Mac. That last thing you want is for all your hard work to get lost in translation between software.  Be prepared to do a tech-free presentation should there be a hardware malfunction.Prepare answers. This one seems pretty obvious but it’s surprising how often candidates can be caught off guard by questions from the audience. Listen attentively, check for clarity if you are not sure what is being asked, and stall with phrases such as “That is an interesting question,” or “You know, I need a minute to think on that,” if you don’t readily have a response. You should also be prepared to answer as many questions as you can think of that may pop up. One way to help with this is to present to someone, or a group, that does not know anything about your topic area. This will help not only make sure you are clear in your presentation but the questions they have may help prepare you for possible questions during the job talk.Practice. As always, practice. This will help you rely less on your slides and notes, seem natural and clear in your discussion, and hopefully appear confident and relaxed. This, in turn, will help you be engaging and show your best self as an instructor, researcher, and future colleague. Practice in the mirror, practice with your friends, practice at the bar with strangers – whatever works for you.What other tips do you have for mastering the job talk?

Transitioning from Graduate School to Academia: Advice from Early Career Scholars

September 13, 2017

By Ethan Van Norman, Georgia State University, with panelists Stacy-Ann January, University of South Carolina; Dave Klingbeil, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; and Wesley Sims, Wichita State UniversityPrevious blog posts described how to navigate the application and interview processes to land an academic job. Whether you are starting at your new position this year (Congratulations!) or plan on entering academia in the near future, the process of transitioning from graduate school or applied practice to academia presents a unique set of challenges. In this blog post we have asked a panel of early career scholars to offer their advice on transitioning to a faculty positions. We will hear from three faculty members who each took different paths to obtaining their current position and are at different phases in their academic careers. Without further ado let’s meet the panel.1.  Please introduce yourself and provide a brief overview of your path to obtaining your current tenure-track position.Hi! My name is Stacy-Ann January [SAJ] and I am an assistant professor at the University of South Carolina in the school psychology Ph.D. program. Prior to beginning this position in August 2016, I completed a 2-year postdoctoral research fellowship at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln that was funded by the Institute of Education Sciences. During my postdoc, I worked on a variety of projects from secondary analysis to ongoing intervention efficacy trials. In addition to an emphasis on publishing manuscripts, I focused on developing skills related to advanced methodology and statistics as well as grant writing and management. I am a proud graduate of the school psychology program at the University of Georgia.My name is Dave Klingbeil [DK] and I obtained my PhD from the University of Minnesota. I completed my predoctoral internship at the Louisiana School Psychology Internship Consortium. I started in my current academic position, at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, in August 2013.I am Wesley Sims [WS], Ph.D., NCSP and I am an Assistant Professor at Wichita State University. My path to my current position began in 2002 when I entered my practitioner level training program at the University of Massachusetts Boston. I was a practicing school psychologist in the St. Louis for several years before returning to graduate school in 2012 at the University of Missouri. While at Mizzou, I continued to work as a practitioner and consultant before beginning an APPIC accredited pre-doctoral internship in New Orleans, LA. Upon completion of my internship with the Louisiana School Psychology Internship Consortium (LASPIC), I accepted a 9-month appointment as a Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Alabama. I joined the school psychology program at WSU at the conclusion of my time with Alabama.2. What have you observed as the biggest challenge in transitioning to your current tenure track position that you wished you had known before you started? What advice can you offer to the readers of this blog to address those challenges?SAJ: The biggest challenge in my transition to a tenure-track faculty member was the shift from being in a position where 100% of my time was devoted to research to one that required a balance of research, teaching, and service. Although I had some experience as an instructor of record as a graduate student, I knew being a tenure-track faculty member would be a different experience. After having conversations with others who made a similar transition, I developed a plan to help. It involved doing a lot of course prep in the summer before starting my position. Still, I was surprised at the amount of time it takes to prep and manage a course. My advice to readers is to start prepping a course soon after you know you will be teaching it. Don’t underestimate how much time it will take. If you are in a position where research excellence is emphasized for tenure and promotion, then be careful not to spend too much time on teaching. Yes, you should be a good instructor. But it is important, especially during your first year or two, to have an appropriate balance of research and teaching activities, so that you can demonstrate research productivity.I would also suggest that readers seek out their institution’s Center for Teaching Excellence (or similar entity) as they will likely have great resources that you could use. This is especially relevant if you have not taught a class independently before. Finally, if possible, don’t reinvent the wheel. If you are teaching a class that has been taught before, find out who has taught the course previously and see what materials (e.g., syllabus, presentation slides) they may be willing to share with you. Even if you don’t do exactly what they do, it would be a great starting point.DK: I think the biggest challenge for me was balancing the demands on my time. In graduate school, my time felt more structured. Starting at UWM, I felt I had fewer concrete demands on your time. Teaching two graduate level classes requires approximately 5 hours per week (face-to-face time) but figuring out how to balance preparing for class, ensuring you have enough productive time for research, and any other demands your first couple of years was certainly a challenge. I would guess most people receive the advice to “focus on research” but that wasn’t all that easy for me to operationally define. I think it is important for people to take the first year and try different things in your classes. Assigning a short (~2 pages) reflection paper on the readings each week may result in you reading the same number of pages per student as a 25-page term paper. You may prefer to grade everything all at once and spend that time on research during the semester, or to spend a couple hours reading things (preferably when you aren’t able to be productive research wise) weekly so that you don’t lose a larger chunk of your time grading. Structuring peer feedback activities (i.e., making this a graded class component) can also help you save your own time dealing with editing and grammatical issues. I have also found that I prefer to teach in the evening because I can spend the morning/afternoon preparing for class (or honestly 4 hours the day before, plus most of the next day during Year 1/2). And, when I am finished teaching I rarely feel like doing much else. So grading quizzes or reading reflection papers is something palatable. The next day is then yours to do with as you wish (at least theoretically).WS: I believe the biggest challenge in transitioning to my current position has been the limited amount of time I have to do what I want to do, primarily writing. There has been a steady stream of new class preps, committee meetings, orientations, trainings, program meetings, department meetings, new faculty meetings, college meetings, kick offs, student meetings, getting to know new coworkers, mentoring meetings, etc. I’m grateful that my immediate coworkers, particularly my mentor, were understanding and supportive of all the different directions I was being pulled. As uncomfortable as it was initially, I have learned to close my office door and dedicate specific time to my work. My recommendations for others is to get to work as early as possible (before everyone else), schedule writing time as if it were a class, and learn to be okay closing your door to limit distracting conversations. If it’s really important, they’ll knock.3. At most institutions, the decision to grant promotion and tenure is based upon an applicant’s accomplishments in the areas of research, teaching, and service. Many would argue that research accomplishments skew that decision. Further, many participants at ECF events frequently seek advice to remain productive with their research. Do you have any recommendations for early career faculty to ensure that they maintain active research agendas particularly in the first few years of their new position?SAJ: First and foremost, you should know your institution’s (and unit’s) Tenure & Promotion guidelines well. Then, spend your time in accordance with those guidelines. You can also consult with trusted individuals at your institution about how best to proportion your time.I have a few recommendations for maintaining research productivity. First, make time for it and engage in self-management of your time. I cannot underscore the importance about being intentional about it. Each semester, I create a list of research tasks I want to complete and by when. Each week, I make a general plan for my time, when and how much time I’m going to spend doing research, teaching, and service activities. I also keep track of my time using a program/app called Toggl (many other programs are available). I started with 3 broad categories (research, teaching, service) and then kept track of everything I did related to those categories. Each week, Toggl sends me an email with a breakdown of how I spent my time during the previous week. I review it to make sure I stay on track with my goals and adjust as necessary. It is also reinforcing when I see that I met or exceeded my research goals.Second, create short and long-term research goals, and take steps to move towards them. You may have to write a research statement when applying for a faculty job, revisit that statement, and revise it if necessary. Likewise, find a way to easily keep track of your study ideas. For example, there are programs/apps (e.g., Endnote) that like you write down your ideas on the go, and sync them across your devices. Then, follow through with your ideas. When working on one study think about what the next study would be, and then go for it.Finally, I think another key to being productive is to develop and maintain collaborative relationships with other researchers in your area. When at conferences or other events, meet people. Follow-up with them and find ways to collaborate. One great way to do this is SPRCC. I was involved in the 2017 SPRCC and would highly recommend that early career scholars apply for the next one, which will be in 2019 before the NASP convention.DK: My advice is to figure out when (and where) you are the most productive. At the end of my second year, a mid-career scholar recommended the book How to Write a Lot (Silvia, 2007), which I found to be helpful. A helpful recommendation was to experiment (as well as set behavioral goals with clear operational definitions) which really helped me increase my productivity.I write best late at night, when there are far fewer distractions. I also tend to be more productive when I write almost every day for 1-2 hours (not always attainable), rather than trying to protect two full days for “research time”. For others, the most productive space may be completely different. You may write best right away in the morning, or (for folks with children) when the house is quiet because everyone is napping. Experiment until you find something that works for you. I can write more between 10 pm and 1 am than I could between 9 to 5. Now I fill my days with things that will help me be productive at night such as clearing other stuff off my plate, preparing for class, or making time for the necessary research support activities (e.g., data cleaning, statistical analyses, reading other articles for a literature review). I also found that your calendar will fill up with stuff during the day (despite our best efforts to keep things clear) so writing in the morning before you come in or in the evening may allow you to keep that time protected.Another thing that helped me was collaborating with peers. My productivity rate significantly increased when I started collaborating with peers from graduate school, internship, folks you meet at NASP, etc. Personally, I think it makes the entire process more enjoyable and hopefully will lead to better research questions and stimulate future research as you and your collaborators think through things together.WS: In short, make research a priority! Beyond the strategies mentioned earlier, I have found activities to promote accountability have been extremely helpful in maintaining my research work. More specifically, I borrowed an activity that was modeled by my mentors at Mizzou. Shortly after arriving at Wichita State, I started a paper writing power hour (PWPH). I invited faculty and students from my department and some faculty from other departments to attend. Each Friday our PWPH group meets to set new weekly writing goals and check in on goals set the week before. PWPH is a set time each week for participants to report progress towards research writing goals. There is some accountability (stating I will do something out loud in front of others), but it serves primarily as a support system and organization tool. It also allows participants to bounce ideas of one another as well as networking and collaboration opportunities. In my case, as the organizer of the group, I believe it served to help establish my reputation as a respectable, contributing, and motivated member of my department.4. Related to the previous question, service is often viewed as an important component of one’s dossier but not as essential as research. How have you approached service at your current (or former) position so that you demonstrated you engage in service, without letting it consume all of your time?SAJ: I have been largely protected from departmental and university service at this stage of my career. The service that I have engaged in has been primarily on editorial boards and with Division 16. My strategy has been to engage in service that is enjoyable and beneficial and/or engage in service that is time limited. For instance, last year I served as a poster session rater for a university-sponsored student research conference. The time commitment was about an hour and a half and I was able to have a record of service to the university during my first year. Also, having a mentor or someone in your department that can help protect you from service is a great thing. These individuals can give you advice about how to respond to requests for serving on committees, and, if you must serve on committees, which ones would be best to serve on.DK: The senior faculty at my institution definitely kept me protected from service my first two years. Unfortunately, that may or may not be the case for everyone. If that isn’t what you are currently experiencing, my suggestion is to find a mid-career or senior faculty member (perhaps via the ECF), external to your University, that you feel comfortable asking questions to. I feel like productive senior scholars say to “just say no” to service but that is much easier said than done (at least for me). If you can get a second opinion from someone you respect, it might be much easier to say, “I’m good on committee work for now.” Your university may also have something similar (UW-Milwaukee has a confidential faculty mentoring program where I was assigned to a tenured faculty mentor during my first year).Outside of that, try to find service activities that are at least marginally related to your research. If you serve as an ad-hoc reviewer, you may find yourself reading manuscripts that are at least related to your own work (but obviously don’t overdo it). Depending on your university requirements, community service activities may include things where you can get your students in local schools providing free services under your supervision (e.g., conducting screenings, providing evidence-based interventions for struggling students). If you that leads to a relationship with the school that will allow you to conduct research in the future, then even better.WS: First, my approach to service has been to trust the advice of my department head and mentor. I have sought their input about which and how many service activities are manageable. Also, I have only involved myself in service activities that are necessary. I also recommend picking selectively and strategically if possible. If there’s a committee working on something you’re passionate about or is important to you, target it for participation. As the only tenure track faculty member in the program currently, I have been forced to attend committee meetings to represent my program. Although I have attended several committee meeting physically, I have managed to avoid leaving with any major responsibilities. Don’t hesitate to play the “new person” or “still learning” card. Thus far, my passive participation has allowed me to serve on the committee without taking on terribly taxing responsibilities as a result of this service.5. A previous ECF blog post discussed the issue of imposter syndrome. A faculty member at my (Van Norman) current institution told me when I started that in many ways I was more similar to my students than the other faculty in the department. Do you have any recommendations for new faculty members dealing with imposter syndrome, particularly as it applies to interacting, instructing, and mentoring students?SAJ: I think the blogpost on imposter syndrome has some great recommendations. It may be helpful to remind yourself that you have the knowledge and experience that comes with having a Ph.D. There is a lot that students can (and should) learn from you. For the courses you are teaching, remember that you are the expert in that topic area. And if there is something you don’t know, admit it and get back with students on the appropriate response. As for mentoring and interacting with students, I think it is important to maintain appropriate boundaries. One way to do this is to be friendly, but not be friends with your students. You can be effective in mentoring them, teaching them what they need to know without becoming a friend.DK: I myself am still learning to mentor students (particularly with research) so I’ll stick to the first two. Again, I think connecting with other assistant professors who you know might help you design courses and activities (and let’s be honest, deal with student situations) that help you decrease the negative effects of imposter syndrome…whatever those effects may be.Also, shamelessly borrow good ideas you recall from your experience as a graduate student. Think about what you liked in your classes or things your previous mentors did that you liked. Then apply your own spin to make those things yours…if it doesn’t work try something else the following week. Sometimes class doesn’t go well…I try to figure out why, adjust what I can, and move on. I also learned quickly just how different/important cohorts in your program are. So things you try Year 1 may not work nearly as well as Year 2. But, if you’re doing the best you can, in the face of all the competing demands on your time, I’m not sure what else you can do.With the exception of completing all of the coursework, completing hundreds (or more) of hours of practica in multiple settings, completing a 2,000-hour internship, potentially working in the field for some time or completing a post-doc; conducting research, and finishing your dissertation…you are more similar to the students than the senior faculty. I am not sure that’s always a bad thing. I think the challenge is more about how to convey your experiences to students in a meaningful way, rather than not knowing enough information.WS: Fake it ‘til ya make it! Unfortunately, I completely understand this feeling. Something I have struggled with, but now appreciate has been maintaining formality in student interactions. It felt pretentious to continue to have students call me “Dr. Sims.” While initially awkward, erring on the side of formality has helped me develop a new sense of identity and tamp down the uncertainty and self-doubt of imposter syndrome. I hope to get to a point when this level of formality can be abandoned with some students, particularly those that work with me outside the classroom more regularly (e.g., teaching and research assistants).6. Thank you for your time in answering these questions. Please feel free to share any parting thoughts/advice that you didn’t have a chance to discuss earlier.SAJ: One more thing I’d like to mention is that I think it is important to have strong mentorship as an early career scholar. I have been fortunate to have received great mentorship, and is part of the reason why I have been successful. As opposed to having a single mentor, I encourage readers to have network of mentors both inside and outside of your institution. They should also provide mentorship in a range of areas, for instance within and outside of your area of research. This way, you can receive mentorship from individuals with a variety of perspectives and areas of expertise.WS: Each system or organization will have its politics. Inevitably, you will find yourself in a situation that will pull you into the politics of your new program, department, college, or institution if you let it. Do all you can to steer clear of getting involved in battles between people or competing agendas that likely started long before your arrival. I will pass on some of the best advice I’ve received about the politics of a new to you job. I was advised to keep my head down, work hard, and don’t get involved. This approach has paid off. On a more positive note, find faculty friends. In your program, department, or beyond, find people that you can socialize with at and outside of work. These relationships will be invaluable over time.Thank you to the panelists for offering your insights! In concluding the blogpost, I would like to turn our readers attention to previous posts that hit upon much of themes brought up by each panelist. Namely, previous blog posts that delve deeper into the issues of politely declining requests from colleagues and administrators (i.e., giving yourself the power to say no) and managing class prep time (hint: do not spend so much time prepping for class) should be particularly helpful.The responses from the current panel offer several new insights, particularly in regards to maximizing ones time to conduct research. First, service (particularly within your university) should not be the foci of one’s efforts early on. Hopefully the faculty in your program are protecting you from time intensive commitments during your first few years. In the event where service is required beyond service to the profession (i.e., editorial board membership, state/national organizations, etc.), one should try to at least choose a task that one is passionate about and has the benefit of being high visibility/low effort. Relatedly, do not feel compelled to volunteer for additional tasks once on those committees, particularly larger college of university committees, when playing the “new” card is forgivable this early on in one’s career. Second, determining when you are most productive at writing and protecting that time is paramount. It may be reinforcing to check off an administrative or grading task from a to-do list, but adds nothing to one’s research dossier.In closing, it is important to highlight that impostor syndrome happens to almost everyone. At this stage in our careers we do not have to have every answer to every question that comes our away. We should not be afraid to seek out advice from mentors and other assistant professors to handle challenging situations as we set out on the long road to promotion and tenure.Do you have other pieces of advice? Or are you seeking advice on a topic not covered in this post? Feel free to comment below or on the ECF Facebook page!

Summertime and the Workin' is Easy: The Five Ps of a Productive Summer

June 1, 2017

By Leandra Parris, Illinois State University & Tamika P. La Salle, University of ConnecticutWe all make those lofty summertime goals in academia, thinking the reduced or nonexistent teaching load plus the relative absence of students will free us up for other projects. Writing those manuscripts that have been brewing on the back burner, finally getting in that R&R, or polishing off that grant you’ve been eyeing.  You just know this is going to be the summer that you get your academic and personal life together, attend to your mental health, go on vacations, tackle those personal projects, and hit the gym every day.Yes, summertime is a great time for work. But it’s also a great time for refreshing your tired academic mind and body. The problem is that, just like the pint of ice cream in the back of the freezer, a small taste of down time is never, ever enough. And with your academic life winning the battle for most of the year, it’s understandable that when work and personal time clash in the summer you tend to opt for that afternoon by the pool instead of revising yet another manuscript or prepping for a new class. So, what is an early career professional to do?The trick, as always, is balance and structure. We’ve put together some ideas that may help you keep or improve your productivity in the summer while also making sure that you don’t burn-out before the next school year even begins.Prioritize. Throughout the year, you have probably had thoughts or made statements along the lines of “that sounds like a good thing to do in the summer” or “I can get to that in the summer.” By May your list is fairly long, as is the list of conferences, weddings, family reunions, camps, and vacations that you plan to attend. This is when it is time to practice what we preach and make a list of priorities.· Things with due dates are easy enough, but things that are simply “need to be done by August” can be more difficult. Set a date for certain tasks that you think is the best-case scenario, and add two weeks to it.· The mistake that a lot of early career professionals make is that they don’t include their personal projects in their list of priorities. What is more important for the whole of your life: repainting the basement or reviewing a manuscript so you can send it back to your co-authors? Depending on the day, that answer can vary! Steve Truscott, Professor at Georgia State University reminds us to “remember to spend some time with people you love and like. You are working so hard to succeed that it is easy to forget that you need some people around who make all the success worthwhile.”Personal. The summer is time to focus on you. Really, focus on you. Unencumbered by the typical day-to-day running of programs, teaching, advising, and supervision, you can do the things that are truly important and valuable to you. Whether it’s writing, reviewing, designing research, conducting research, or improving your skills as a trainer, use this time to focus on the things that you are passionate about. Doing so will not only springboard you into the fall with renewed energy for your career, but will also make working in the summer feel more enjoyable, and less like…working. Reconnect with what brought you to this field and let it flourish in the open space of summer. “Mix a little pleasure with a little work. I find ethnographies to read in the summer so it feels more like a novel” says Tara Raines, Assistant Professor at the University of Denver. The same is true for your personal summer goals. Make them about you, your family, etc., --whatever is going to improve your well-being and give you enough me-time to prepare for when fall rolls around again.Pragmatic. Being pragmatic should come naturally to school psychologists. We are trained to do what is most reasonable, makes the most sense, and is evidence-based to be efficient and effective. Which means we all know that the overworked mind will eventually begin to interfere with any hope of productivity. And yet we continue to hesitate to say no to requests, take on multiple projects, overextend our commitments, and triple book our calendars. Early career professionals are notorious for not refusing any opportunities to add a line to their vitae. But it is important to be pragmatic in your approach to summer. What is reasonable? What is ideal? What is reinforcing? What does your academic to-do list look like up against your psychological well-being need list? How many manuscripts do you really need out this summer, how many grants have to be in during this round? Give yourself space, and time, to address the inevitable surprise or forgotten deadline. “Don’t plan anything from mid August on as that is all class and prep for the semester. Use May-June to get your biggest writing advantage times” says Sandy Chafouleas, Professor at the University of Connecticut.Pace. Pacing is key. Some people function well by charging through their academic goals during the first of the summer, leaving the last half for family, fun, and self-care. Others find that working daily, playing daily, and spreading out their down time is more effective. It really is dependent on your work style, your summer deadlines, and the rest of the world’s schedule. If you go with the first option, keep to a daily schedule that maximizes your time in the office. Melissa Bray, Professor at the University of Connecticut says “My advice is to write very day- or ever other (1/2 page to a page at a time only). This makes a world of difference in getting articles done and out.”  A daily to-do list is a must and you will want very clear start-and-stop dates for projects. If you can do the slow-and-steady approach, there is some flexibility in how you approach tasks. For example, one schedule may include writing for 2 hours every morning Tuesday-Thursday, working on grants in the afternoon, and using the four-day weekend to work around the house, engage in hobbies, or take smaller vacations. If a larger vacation is planned, then the three-day work week can easily be shifted to a full work week to compensate. You can also find the small moments throughout your travels – plane rides, long care rides – to do smaller tasks that will add up to large, meaningful contributions to your work.Play. Get out and do the things that you love and that you could not do during a typical semester. Remind yourself that work is not all that you are, and be okay with taking the afternoon, or even the week, to get back to those old hobbies. Lisa Sanetti, Associate Professor at the University of Connecticut says, “ For me it’s also important to schedule in true breaks from work. I will take my work e-mail off my phone and just relax with family during scheduled times.” All the reminders that academia is more than just a job will be waiting for you in the fall. You need to engage in some serious self-care, and whether you do that throughout the summer or during one set time period, make sure that when you decide it’s time for your personal life that you take it very seriously. It should be just as important throughout the year, but summer is the time to really set up those boundaries and protect the time that you need to refresh, recovery, and prepare.Hopefully these tips can help you accomplish your goals for the summer and get you prepared, professionally and personally, for Fall 2017. In the mean time, if you have any additional tips for your fellow early career academics, please comment below to share!

Demystifying the Peer Review Process: Advice from Associate Editors

May 1, 2017

Guest post by Ethan R. Van Norman, Georgia State UniversityIn a previous post, the ECF offered guidance on identifying where to submit a manuscript. One piece of advice was to consider the composition of the journal’s editorial board. From that we can infer that the likelihood your paper will be viewed favorably depends in part on the background and theoretical orientation of the individuals that will review your paper. Many of the readers of the ECF serve on those editorial boards. In the frenzy to submit papers and hopefully obtain tenure, it is easy to lose sight of the importance and necessity of the peer review process. In fact, wading through reviewer comments to revise an article (if we are so lucky to be invited to do so) is often viewed as a chore instead of an opportunity to improve our work. Such woes may be self-inflicted (e.g., we did a poor job setting up the rationale for our study or overlooked critical threats to the internal validity of our findings) or, as many of us would rather believe, we are tasked with addressing reviewer comments that appear to be devoid of meaningful content or consist of unfair criticisms without solutions. The purpose of this blog post is to highlight steps that early career scholars can take to ensure that the reviews they provide are of the variety to make the revision process for colleagues as pain free as possible.In November Michelle Demaray discussed serving on an editorial board pre-tenure. In that post Dr. Demaray cited two important characteristics of a reviewer: (1) promptness and editorial board etiquette as well as (2) writing quality reviews. The purpose of this post is to further discuss what constitutes a high-quality review from the perspective of associate editors. This topic is particularly relevant for early career scholars because many universities expect pre-tenure faculty to serve on editorial boards. Indeed, serving on an editorial board is an effective and meaningful way to engage in service for the field. Beyond early career considerations, peer review is a mechanism to ensure scholarly work of sufficient quality and importance is published. High quality reviews can help authors re-conceptualize or refine the initial premises of the paper, which may ultimately lead to a more meaningful or methodologically sound work.To further explore what early career faculty can do to complete high quality reviews, we solicited responses to a series of questions from two associate editors of school psychology journals. Given the somewhat sensitive nature of the questions, we elected to withhold the names of the associate editors. The ECF is grateful for the feedback from both contributors.Advice to ReviewersQuestion 1: What types of comments do you seek from reviewers? That is, which type of comments do you find the most useful when rendering your editorial decision? Is there a general “approach” you recommend reviewers take when conducting a review?AE #1: I find that reviews that not only provide a general perspective on the manuscript, but also provide specific information regarding strengths and questions/concerns to be the most useful. Reviewers who articulate the big ideas from their review (e.g., conceptualization issues, methodological strengths and problems, how findings were reported) up front and then expand by illustrating specific instances that support their perspectives not only help me make sense of their viewpoints, but also can help the authors with any subsequent revisions. In other words, I think a critical discussion of the manuscript typically is more helpful than a list of issues that require the authors and the action editor to construct the reviewer’s message.AE #2: I find reviews most helpful if they (a) comprehensively evaluate each section of the manuscript, (b) provide an overall evaluation of the manuscript, (c) are constructive, and (d) note positive attributes of the manuscript.Question 2: Relatedly, to what degree do you consider reviewer feedback when rendering your editorial decision? Can you elaborate on a situation in which you rendered a decision counter to the prevailing opinion of the reviewers – or the circumstances in which that might occur?AE #1: Reviewer feedback absolutely informs the decisions that I render. I am one person who cannot possibly have a command of all of the issues surrounding a given topic or study. Quality reviews help me identify and think through issues relevant to a manuscript. In many instances, they also can help with articulating the rationale for a decision and issues to be addressed if a revision is invited. I have yet to render a decision for a manuscript that was not consistent with at least one or more of the reviewers; however, when I have rendered different decisions than those recommended by individual reviewers, it typically had to do with a difference in perspective (e.g., the appropriateness of the methods used, the fit of the manuscript for the journal). As much as we often strive to be objective in our field, subjectivity absolutely is a part of the peer review process.AE #2: I strongly consider reviewer feedback as a critical component of the peer review process. An editorial decision is not, however, a “vote count” or tally. In some instances, I or a reviewer may identify a critical flaw not identified by other reviewers.Question 3: Inevitably every author will receive an undesirable editorial decision. However, it seems that subjective experience of the peer review process can be highly influenced by the tone of reviewers. Do you have any advice to reviewers to ensure that their comments are as constructive and as respectful as possible?AE # 1: The peer review process requires a critical review of manuscripts so that scientifically-sound work gets published. However, it can be easy to get on a roll with issues you identify and not remember that other human beings will be on the other side of the decision letter. It helps me to remember that science is a tool invented and used by humans to try and understand their world, which means that no scientific endeavor is perfect. However, all papers I have reviewed or have been the action editor for had strengths in addition to limitations. Additionally, I would encourage reviewers to remember that nobody is correct 100% of the time. It doesn’t hurt to include language such as “my perspective…” or “my thoughts are…” when you don’t agree with a decision that could be defensible.AE #2: I think it is helpful to make comments that are encouraging, specific, and can be addressed. It is particularly useful when reviewers point to a paper or resource authors can review to improve their work.Question 4:  If you had to give 1-2 key tips for new reviewers, what would they be?AE #1: Remember the reviews that you have found the most helpful as an author. I suggest operating from the spirit of pointing out issues and providing suggestions to assist the authors in improving the scholarship represented by the manuscript. It isn’t a reviewer’s job to tell the authors what to do, but providing your perspectives and suggestions can do wonders for authors who ultimately want to see their work published.AE #2: Accept or decline invitations to review quickly, submit reviews on-time, and create comprehensive and constructive reviews.Advice to AuthorsQuestion 1: It seems that receiving a decision of “Revise and Resubmit” is often a sigh of relief for new authors. What advice do you have for authors to increase the likelihood that they will receive the coveted “Tentative Accept” or similar decision without going through multiple rounds of reviewer feedback and revisions?AE #1: I always recommend putting the decision letter down after the initial read and coming back to it once you have had a chance to reflect on how you will respond. Once you come back to it, I strongly recommend that you make sure that you thoroughly and clearly address any direction for revisions provided by the action editor. S/he basically is telling you what s/he expects to see for the paper to be published. I also would write a very clear response letter that articulates exactly how you responded to the requested revisions and provides a strong rationale for any revisions you decided not to make (I would minimize these instances as they will need to be very compelling to convince an editor that his/her initial direction should not have been addressed by the authors). I also would clearly articulate how you responded to any reviewer comments not directly addressed by the editor.AE #2:1. Include testable research questions that emanate clearly from the literature review.2. Make explicit the importance and implications of the study.3. Clearly link all sections together, based on the research questions.4. Include only implications that are supported by the study findings.5. Adhere to the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.).6. Attend to details.Question 2: The time from submitting a manuscript to a journal and receiving an editorial decision can seem excruciatingly long. Given that different journals set different expectations for rendering a decision, do you have any advice as to when an author should follow up with an associate editor regarding a paper? Further, do you have any advice in going about making that request?AE #1: I definitely would not follow-up before the anticipated decision date. I can’t speak for other action editors, but I would not mind receiving a follow-up email at any point after the communicated timeframe for rendering a decision (2-3 months for my journal). In terms of making the request, I would recommend letting the action editor know that you understand how busy s/he is, but that you were wondering when you might expect to receive a decision. Most of us have been in your shoes as an author and a respectful email may facilitate us moving up on our to-do list rendering a decision on your manuscript.AE #2: Many journals report average time to decision. I recommend checking the journal website and any associated materials that may identify a timeline. I think it is reasonable to check-in with an Associate Editor or Editor two months after the average time to decision. If a timeline is not reported, I think it is reasonable to check-in after about 9-months.ConclusionFor more information on the peer review process in School Psychology, Floyd, Cooley, Arnett, Fagan, Mercer, and Hingle (2011) highlight, among other things, what editors consider to be desirable characteristics of reviewers. In line with the comments offered from the current associate editors, editors in that study viewed reviewers that provided constructive feedback with specific strategies to overcome perceived shortcomings as being the most helpful. To that end, early career scholars can seek out references to identify how to write constructive feedback for reviews (e.g., http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/review-manuscript-ce-video.aspx) as well as handbooks that detail desiderata for different quantitative (e.g., Hancock & Mueller, 2010) and qualitative (e.g., Trainor & Graue, 2013) methods. In conclusion, it’s important to remember that conducting high quality reviews is important for our field. Yes, turning in another review may be another item on your weekly to do list, but the next time you grumble about the amount of time it’s been since you heard back from a journal or the next time your call a colleague to vent about the tone and content of a review you received– take a moment to look back at the most recent review you completed. Did you complete it on time? Was the tone respectful? Did you offer specific rationale for the criticisms you offered and provide specific recommendations to address those criticisms? Were the critiques fair to begin with? Reviewing others how you’d like to be reviewed may go a long way in ensuring the revision process is a worthwhile endeavor.Do you have different perspectives for how to conduct a high-quality review? Do you use different resources / approaches to review papers? Feel free to share your insights / experiences in the comment section below!ReferencesFloyd, R. G., Cooley, K. M., Arnett, J. E., Fagan, T. K., Mercer, S. H., Hingle, C. (2011). An overview and analysis of journal operations, journal publication patterns, and journal impact in school psychology and related fields. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 617-647.Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (Eds.). (2010). The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods. New York, NY: RoutledgeTrainor, A., A., & Graue, E. (Eds.). (2013). Reviewing qualitative research in the social sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.

Where Should I Send My Manuscript? Journal Options for Researchers in School Psychology

March 22, 2017

A common concern among early career researchers is how to identify appropriate journals for their work. Researchers in school psychology publish in a broad range of journals – from school psychology, to general and special education, educational psychology and other subfields of psychology, public health, prevention science, and other fields depending on the topic of a given manuscript. Productive scholars know it is essential to understand the nuances of potential outlets and their respective audiences when before submitting a manuscript. Even within a relatively small field like school psychology, each journal is unique, so a manuscript should be tailored to the journal to which it is submitted. The flip side is that barring fatal flaws, there is a fitting outlet for most manuscripts.How do you identify potential publishing outlets?

• Check your reference list. If you cite multiple papers from a given journal or subfield, it’s likely your paper will fit in that journal or subfield as well.
• Consider where similar scholars publish their work. If others in your area publish in particular journals, you can infer that you work might also have a home there.
• Search the Journal Citation Reports.Web of Science’s JCR allows you to search for all journals indexed by category and rankable by journal metrics. There’s no category for school psychology, but most school psychology journals are include in the category, Psychology – Educational. Other categories that may be of interest to school psychology researchers are Education & Educational Research; Education – Special; Health Policy & Services; Psychology – Applied; Psychology – Developmental; Psychology – Multidisciplinary; and Social Issues.
• Ask your colleagues, collaborators, and mentors. This can be especially helpful for early career scholars. Many publications have reputations independent of journal metrics. Colleagues in your department, field, or area of study can help you to understand the stature of specific journals or subfields of journals within school psychology or your institution. Colleagues can also be helpful in understanding the idiosyncrasies of the journal scope, expectations, and review process, which may inform your decision about whether or not to submit your work to an outlet.

How do you select the best fit for your manuscript?

• Review journal websites. Most journals have a website where the purpose, scope, author guidelines, editorial board, and other journal-specific information is provided. When preparing a manuscript submission to a journal, it’s important to ensure your manuscript is consistent with the scope and type of manuscripts accepted (e.g., original study, review, brief report, commentary) and follows the author guidelines or submission requirements (e.g., implications for specific audiences).
• Peruse recent issues and online first publications. You can gain insight into the types of work regarded favorably by an editor and editorial board by considering the topical areas and types of papers recently published. These articles can also provide clues about stylistic idiosyncrasies of the journal.
• Read the editor’s commentaries. Most editors serve discrete terms and it’s common for an incoming editor to publish a commentary on their vision for a journal at the beginning of their term. It’s a great resource when considering fit, particularly if there have not been multiple issues published under the new leadership.
• Check out the editorial boards. It’s likely that a submitted manuscript will be reviewed by one or more members of a journal’s editorial board. You can gauge the applicable expertise of board members, and often even suggest specific reviewers. The constituency of the editorial board provides indication of the expertise—and by extension, the scholarship—valued by the editorial team.
• Review journal metrics. There are a variety of metrics used to evaluate journal stature (e.g., impact per publication, source normalized impact per paper, SCImago journal rank, total cites, eigenfactor score, h-index, immediacy index, article influence score). Select journal metrics are included in the Journal Citation Reports and are often reported on journal websites. Many institutions value publications in high status journals and make inferences about the quality and impact of an article based on select metrics of a journal.  Consequently, the journals in which a scholar has published are often taken into consideration in review of researchers during hiring, promotion/tenure process, grant reviews, and selection for honors/awards. If you are in a unit or institution where journal metrics are a focus, it may be important to consider journal metrics when selecting outlets for your work.

It’s not uncommon for early career scholars to wonder what the journals in school psychology are as a starting point. Here’s a list of several peer-reviewed school psychology journals: Journal of School Psychology, School Psychology Review, School Psychology Quarterly, Psychology in the Schools, School Psychology International, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, Journal of Applied School Psychology, School Psychology Forum, Contemporary School Psychology, International Journal of School and Educational Psychology, and The Trainer’s Forum. keep in mind, however, that most school psychology scholars publish in a wide array of journals, so don’t limit yourself to school psychology journals.So, there are a variety of strategies you can use to determine potential outlets for your work. We invite others to share recommendations and reflections on these tips. Have a question? Post below and we’ll provide more information.

Work Hard, Play Hard, Be Mindful: Getting the Most Out of NASP as an Early Career Professional

February 13, 2017

By Leandra Parris, Illinois State UniversityAttending professional conferences is arguably one of the biggest perks of being in school psychology. The week of NASP offers some of the greatest opportunities to network, explore research topics, and increase your involvement in the field. There is, of course, the added bonus of traveling to cities that you might not have otherwise visited, catching up with friends, and perhaps enjoying an afternoon by the hotel pool. For many of us, the week of NASP is a respite from our day-to-day grind and, dare I say it, a chance to relax a little. But despite all that NASP has to offer, it can be easy to let the week pass by without being productive. Here are some lessons learned and tips to help you get the most out of this year’s conference.Prepare. As a graduate student, I could not wait to get my convention program and read through all the sessions, planning out my week. Unfortunately, I often waited until the first day of the conference to do so. Early career professionals will find that their time is quickly filled up if they are not careful. Between sessions, workshops, meetings, and social hours it’s hard to keep up with everything you need to be attending. Instead of waiting until you get to the conference hotel, look ahead weeks in advance. Treat the week the same as you do any other work week, be it Google Calendar, Microsoft Outlook, or the tried-and-true paper agenda. Block off events as you agree to them and organize your commitments carefully, keeping in mind that you may have to travel from one hotel to another between events. As good as a blank week in your calendar looks, you’ll be grateful for the advanced organization once you get to NASP.Network, Your Way. For some people, networking is fun and exciting. For others, it can be one of the most anxiety provoking or exhausting aspects of their career. The trick is to find the strategy that is most comfortable for you while also meeting your needs. The good news is that they are many ways of networking at NASP. In fact, there are so many we had to break this category down:Seek support from colleagues. One strategy is to attend events or meet up with your senior colleagues. Having been in the field longer they have already built their network and being introduced by a colleague can be less stressful than the walk up version of a cold call. Pairing yourself with someone they already know also helps other professionals remember you, while giving you a slight boost in comfort approaching them on your own in the future.Get out and about.Whether it’s dinner, a social hour, or conference event, if you are asked to join someone or a group, do your best to seize the opportunity. Some of the best working relationships I have were the result of a spontaneous coffee break. If you are less comfortable working a large room, smaller venues such as lunches or group receptions may be your best opportunity for networking. Regardless, the more visible you make yourself, the greater your chances of expanding your network.Participate in mentoring events. There are multiple mentorship opportunities throughout the convention. From the Early Career Forum Speed Mentoring to the Student and Early Career Professionals of Color Mentoring Round Table, these events provide structured opportunities to network with others in the field. The purpose of these events is not only to provide a chance for mentorship for one night, but also to help you establish connections that last beyond the conference. Whether you’re looking for advice for training, research, service, or navigating the field in general, these events are a must for early career school psychologists.Reach out. It helps look up sessions and events where you are most likely to meet the people you are hoping to add to your network. For example, poster sessions are often a mingling spot for those interested in similar research. If there is a particular person you have in mind, attend their talk and introduce yourself afterwards. This strategy is also helpful for building a network that includes faculty in similar stages of career development. Most people think of networking as building relationships with already well-established individuals. Just as important is the ability to build working relationships with those who share your interests (e.g., research, training) and will have similar experiences as a growing professional. A strong, collaborative cohort is priceless.Distribute business cards. For those times that you only have a few minutes to introduce yourself, always have a business card as a back-up. This is a good way to handle the “I really want to touch base again but I need to go” moment that so often happens. And don’t be afraid to ask for contact information in return.Rinse and repeat. Regardless of your personal style, repetition is required for successful networking. Everyone is busy and often introduced to many people throughout the week. So don’t be surprised if someone you met at the last conference doesn’t remember you. Be prepared to re-introduce yourself, and your interests, multiple times. And if your first meeting didn’t go quite as well as you had hoped, start over with a clean mind set the next time you get the chance to introduce yourself.Attend Special Topic/Group Events: There is always at least one, if not more, break out sessions that you will find helpful for improving your research or training. There are also events sponsored by the Society for the Study of School Psychology that offer guidance and networking related specifically to research. In particular, the Early Career Forum is also hosting several events, listed at the end of this post. Additionally, there are several interest groups that meet throughout the conference. Learn more about groups you may want to join by visiting booths in the exhibit hall or reaching out to the organizers. These groups are a great way to get involved.Be a Learner. With all the networking, socializing, and business meetings it can be easy to forget that one of the main purposes of the conference is to learn from others. While it is good to attend sessions relevant to your research, it is also helpful to attend sessions about topics you don’t know as much about. This is particularly important if there are topics included in your courses that you are not as familiar with through your research or clinical experiences. This is a chance to learn something new, as opposed to spending the week absorbing information you already knew. Listen to those around you, hear others’ ideas and experiences, and learn from them.Get Comfortable. NASP can be a long week and involves a lot of walking. At the same time, there are also long periods of sitting in chairs that vary in comfort (or even the floor). You should dress for the occasion, but do so comfortably. Breaking in a new pair of shoes is not recommended, nor is wearing clothes that would keep you from power walking to your next event. Along those lines, it’s helpful to pack a snack and bottle of water just in case meals are delayed (or missed entirely).Work Hard, Play Hard, Be Mindful. As school psychologists, we work hard. And we know how to play hard. The most successful of us do both in equal measure. The NASP convention offers plenty of opportunities to get work done while having fun as well. Plan out a path for the week that gives you the greatest chance of meeting your professional goals (e.g., professional development, networking, getting new research ideas), but be flexible in its execution. Explore the local culture, but be back in time for that reception/social hour/networking event. Be mindful in the experiences you seek out by choosing activities that will be the most beneficial to your professional growth, do not try to do it all. And if you have a moment, stop and take in the fact that you are in a field that allows you to be a lifelong learner, build lasting professional relationships, and all while impacting the services provided to those who need it the most.Finally, don’t forget about the Early Career Forum events at NASP 2017 listed here.See you in San Antonio!

Congratulations, You've Been Invited to Campus! Now What?

January 4, 2017

A delightful idiosyncrasy of tenure-track positions is the rigorous selection process, which, if you are successful in your applications, includes an invitation for a campus visit. The campus visit is more than an interview; it generally consists of a series of meals, meetings, tours, and presentations with members of the search committee, other faculty, students, and administrators over one to two days. Most campus visits involve a job talk, or colloquia, on your research agenda or a single project, and may also include a teaching demonstration or case study presentation. The campus visit provides an opportunity for the search committee to get to know you better and to solicit feedback from other stakeholders, but it is also a chance for you to determine whether you want the position, so it’s important to make the most of the trip.Prepare for Your VisitTake time to learn about the program, unit, and institution. You’ll encounter questions about your fit and goals relative to the unit and program, so be prepared. It’s also good to have a basic familiarity about the faculty. We’ve provided sample questions you may encounter and may ask elsewhere. I’ve been on search committees where candidates have disarmed committee members with their lack of knowledge about the program and faculty. For example, when asked with whom you might collaborate, “I don’t know” isn’t a good answer and the name of a professor at the peer institution one state over is an even worse one. Likewise, if you are asked what you are interested in teaching and you list courses incompatible with the program orientation, you’ve just provided a major red flag to the faculty. In addition, you’ll likely be offered numerous opportunities to ask questions about the positon and program, so if you have absolutely no questions about the program, unit, or department, the committee will likely infer lack of interest in the position. It’s perfectly acceptable—and expected—that you will come with a list of questions, so do so.Know your itinerary. The search committee will generally make your travel arrangements and itinerary. You can expect the university to pick up the tab. You may have the opportunity to request specific meetings, so knowing the program is helpful there. You should also request breaks if needed if they aren’t offered (e.g., don’t be afraid to let them know you need a couple 20-30 minute breaks if you are nursing, or to ask for 15 minutes or more before your job talk). You’ll likely be involved in meetings and presentations from breakfast through dinner, so be prepared to be on all day. Plan your attire accordingly. Use the itinerary to tailor your questions to the specific groups and individuals with whom you’ll meet.Wow Them with a Great Job TalkFor most tenure-line positions, the job talk is the highlight of the visit because it provides the opportunity for the broadest audience to get to know you (they’ll likely be surveyed afterwards to provide feedback). The talk usually last 45 minutes to an hour, including time for questions. Query the search committee chair about the type of talk expected—sometimes they’ll want a detailed overview of a single project, but other times they’ll expect a more general overview of your research program with projects highlighted. You can expect the attending faculty to inquire about the specific studies discussed, implications, future directions, and the links to their own work (which is why it helps to do your homework in advance). When posed with challenging questions, don’t be afraid to ask for clarification or to say, “I don’t know” or “I don’t know that yet.” Use those tough questions to acknowledge a new angle or unanswered question.This is the main opportunity for your potential colleagues to get to know you as a scholar; make the most of it. Structure your talk in a way that reflects your scholarship and desired trajectory. Be concise in your preparation of visual materials, avoiding wordy slides, or overly complex graphics. Keep in mind that if you aren’t required to do a teaching demo, your audience may also use your job talk to infer your potential to teach effectively. You should gear your presentation to both generalists and specialists since your audience will likely include faculty who do not have a background in school psychology or your area of concentration.Be sure to practice your talk, preferably with an audience to ensure timely progress and clarity. You should also be familiar enough with your talk to proceed without slides or other visuals if necessary. Prepare for the near inevitability of technology mishaps by having access to your presentation in multiple places (e.g., flash drive, email, cloud) and being prepared to present without PowerPoint should hardware fail (e.g., have a hard copy of notes and handouts that can be copied last minute).Make Every Interaction CountYou will likely engage in several meetings and meals with faculty, students, and other university stakeholders. Meals may occur in formal restaurants, campus eateries, or even a faculty member’s homes These meals are intended to provide an opportunity to evaluate applicants’ fit as a colleague— that is, beyond your potential to contribute to the field as a scholar and trainer, are you someone who others will want to have as a colleague. That is, do they want you in the office next door/down the hall for the next one to forty years?It is likely that meals will include program faculty, departmental faculty, and at times, students. As previously noted, you will also be evaluated during informal interactions (e.g., meals, in the car on the way from and to the airport, walking from one meeting to the next with a student or faculty host, etc.). You should engage everyone who joins you. It is important that you maintain a professional, approachable, and authentic demeanor.If It’s a Good Fit, Hope for an OfferIdeally, the result of your visit will be a contract offer. An offer will typically be made by the department chair or dean and will include some or all of the following: title; contract term; salary; responsibilities teaching load; course assignments; probationary period; terms of performance evaluation; allowances for travel, research, professional development, graduate/research assistants; relocation expenses; equipment and office space. If you’ve not yet completed your dissertation, it may also include the terms of a conditional appointment until your degree is completed which may include an alternate title, reduced salary, and a deadline to defend. In many institutions, many of the terms of an offer are negotiable, so you should be strategic, yet honorable, in requesting modifications. If any of these items are not included in the offer letter and are of concern to you, you should inquire through the person who delivered the offer.Your requests should be based on your short and long-term goals and what you think you need in order to be effective in your position. In some instances, this will largely be informed by the circumstances  most conducive to your research productivity. Some of the items you request will be essential (e.g., critical materials or funds to initiate your research program at the institution) and others preferred but not necessary (e.g., summer salary, course releases). This is another area in which doing your homework is important because it can provide information regarding the types and amount of resources you can procure. For instance, salary requests should generally be within a range typical of that position at the institution and peer institutions based on your qualifications and accomplishments. Likewise, start up requests should reflect actual needs. Typically, stronger qualifications and accomplishments give you more bargaining power.If you have applied for multiple positions, you might find yourself choosing between multiple offers. Both the data gathered during the campus visit and contract terms will inform your decision. You should also consider promotion and tenure criteria, workload, institutional resources, professional development opportunities, research support, teaching supporting, mentoring opportunities, collegiality, faculty governance, community characteristics and resources, location, and anything else that may be germane to your professional development, lifestyle, and general satisfaction.When faced with two or more attractive positions in which you could envision yourself, your decision may be decided by the terms of the contract. In these cases, you may ask a school to change their offer to match or trump what you have been offered elsewhere. If you have no intention of accepting a position, you should let them know promptly so that the search committee can move forward with other options. Because many programs are hiring simultaneously and may share candidates, you cost a program their other candidates if you keep them on the line even when you know you won’t accept. In general, you should be discreet and forthright with all parties since your behavior in this process will contribute to your professional reputation. Whether you accept a given position or not, the faculty on the search committee are now part of your professional community.If At First You Don’t Succeed, Regroup, Reflect, and ReapplyThere may be times when your job search is unproductive or you are not offered the position for which you hoped. If you are not invited for any phone interviews or campus visits, you may ask a mentor or other trusted colleague to review your materials to identify potential improvements. Poorly presented application materials can lead to negative evaluations of your appropriateness for a position. Even when your credentials and experience are strong, failure to follow directions or conform to expectations in your field can undermine the success of your application. Conversely, you may not be a competitive candidate for the positions you seek, so additional research, teaching, or field experience may be needed.If you participated in screenings or campus interviews and didn’t garner an offer, it could be that there was nothing wrong with your qualifications or fit per se, but that there was simply a stronger candidate. It will often be difficult to determine why you were not offered a position since multiple factors inform the decision. If you have a trusted colleague at the institution(s) you visited, you may seek feedback regarding your performance during the research talk and other activities. After each visit, you should also have reflected on what worked and didn’t; what questions or interactions you struggled with; and what information you needed but didn’t get so that you can do better the next time. You can use this information to fine-tune your efforts when a new position becomes available.Do you still have questions about what to expect or how to navigate the process? Post your questions here and we’ll respond ASAP.This post is a short form of: Sullivan, A. L., Proctor, S., & Clemens, N. (2012). So you want to be a professor? Perspectives on the academic job search process – Part II – Interviewing and beyond.The School Psychologist, 67(1), 74-83.