Peer review, as the term suggests, has been the standard for maintaining the quality of academic research publications. The traditional model of peer review involves research papers being assessed by a small number or group of scholars having expertise in the same field, before publication. There are two prominent modes of review that exist in the traditional peer review process, which are single-anonymized peer review and double-anonymized peer review. Despite its crucial role in the academic research publication process, it is undeniable that biases persist within this system.
Read MoreWould-be tenured professors enter academia with dewy-eyed excitement envisioning their idealized career as thought-leaders and knowledge transferers. Yet, for some underrepresented minority faculty that golden ticket has proven ever elusive. This is particularly true for Indigenous scholars who currently make up approximately 1% of full-time US faculty. Administrators and faculty leaders should therefore re-consider existing policies to determine if they create systemic barriers to Indigenous and minority faculty success. If we are ever going to end the underrepresentation of Indigenous faculty, changes need to me made at an institutional level.
Read MoreMany of us who do LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and nonbinary, and queer) research are LGBTQ ourselves. What makes this particularly challenging for LGBTQ researchers is that there are unique stressors related to being an LGBTQ researcher. There are also unique stressors related to doing LGBTQ research. In my article Doubly Marginalized: Addressing the Minority Stressors Experienced by LGBTQ+ Researchers Who Do LGBTQ+ Research, I outline how being LGBTQ in higher education is related to higher rates of marginalization of us as people.
Read MoreAre female scholars underrepresented in science? Does the gender of an author influence the impact and usage of a scientific paper? Is it more challenging for female scholars than for their male peers to join the club of the most productive elite scholars? The phenomenon of a potential gender bias in favor of male scholars was named the Matilda effect by Margaret W. Rossiter in 1993. Empirical evidence proves that female scholars experience negative discrimination against them worldwide and in virtually all disciplines. They are underrepresented in the higher ranks of academia, less likely to win scientific awards, and receive smaller grants less often than their male colleagues.
Read MoreInformed by intellectual pursuits, academic journeys are as experiential as they are conceptual, responsive to encounters with people and ideas that shape our thinking and being. While grounded within my specific circumstances and the domains of music, the arts, and qualitative research in the social sciences, the issues addressed in this article underlie academic trajectories across disciplinary and geographical cultures.
Read More