... especially for those of us whose written work is inter-intra, cross or mutiplinary within the humanities and arts research fields. Here is an email originating from Dr Margretta Jolly, University of Sussex via Professor Gillian Whitlock FAHA, at UQ. Think about your writing genre and when necessary ensure you all have input into this second round of journal round of tweaking.
On Behalf Of
Margaretta Jolly
Sent: Wednesday, 23 March 2011 2:10 AM
To: clhlwr
Subject: [CLHLWR] clhlwr: Journal Rankings--The Case for 'Biography' (fwd)
Dear Colleagues
As some of you will know, 2 years ago the Australian Research Council
(ARC) introduced a system of journal rankings as part of its Excellence in
Research initiative. This was a contentious and difficult process, which
produced a series of A*, A, B and C gradings for journals that publish
scholarly research. I cannot explain why the premier journal in our
research field, ?Biography?, received the lowest grade of ?C?, but to the
embarrassment of many of us it appears that parochialism and effective
lobbying 2 years ago produced this extraordinary outcome. At first we
presumed this was a typo and easily corrected, since Biography's previous
ranking, granted one year earlier, had been A*. That wasn?t the final
ranking, though, and altering this ranking is going to be a tough campaign.
There is now a window of opportunity to begin this, and I am appealing to
you to help us redress this bizarre outcome before April 3, when the
public consultation process will conclude. The ARC has established a
website where scholars can log on, register, and offer feedback and advice
on appropriate rankings for scholarly journals. Here is the URL:
https://roci.arc.gov.au/
It is important that as many of us as possible log on and comment to
redress this injustice and alter this ranking. I've posted below a paper
which sets out for you the grounds you may use to make a case for
?Biography?, and I hope you will feel you can support my recommendation
that it be recoded as an A* journal. Here are the characteristics of A*
publications:
Typically an A* journal is one of the best in its field or
subfield in which to publish and typically covers the entire
field/subfield. Virtually all papers they publish are of a very high
quality. These are journals where most of the work is important (that
really shape the field) and where researchers boast about getting
accepted. Acceptance rates are typically low and the editorial board is
dominated by field leaders, including many from top institutions. (Please
see the description of the journal for information about the editorial
board. This might be the sole reason for the mistaken ranking.)
If ?Biography? does not deserve this ranking it really isn?t clear to me
what does!
I want to stress that although this may seem to be an Australian issue,
this isn?t so. Scholars everywhere are the ?public? in this consultation
process. Journal rankings and the quality research audit process will
migrate internationally, and this error in assessment can only be
corrected by a strong response from an international research community in
our field. I apologise that you will need to encounter some tedious and
possibly unfamiliar codings to make this response at the website, but due
recognition of the premier journal in our field is urgent and necessary.
Explanations of FoR codes and suggestions for peak bodies are
disconcerting I know but they are addressed in the attached paper for your
information.
This is Phase 1 of the review process and Phase 2 will involve peak
bodies assessing the feedback received at the website, so if we get a
strong response we can attract attention to our case. Let me emphasize you
have just a week or so to do this ? until April 3. Please don?t put this
off, we need 15 minutes of your time, and forward this email to other
scholars in associated networks if you can.
Regards
Gillian Whitlock
Professor Gillian Whitlock FAHA
ARC Professorial Fellow
The University of Queensland
St Lucia Q4072
Australia
Ph: +61 7 0410673300
G.Whitlock@uq.edu.au