In this episode of the Scholarly Peers podcast, host Sin-Wang engages with Susan Samardjian, who shares her experiences and insights on academic travel. They discuss the essential items Susan brings on her trips, including a physical notebook, a book related to her research, an iPad for convenience, and snacks for stress relief. The conversation dives into the importance of reading for relaxation, the role of technology in academia, and how these items reflect Susan's identity and values. They also explore the stress associated with academic life and future aspirations.

In this episode , host Sin-Wang Chong introduces a new series titled 'Researchers in a Bag,' focusing on the personal aspects of researchers' lives beyond their academic work. Joined by guest Jenny Taylorson, they discuss the significance of personal items that researchers carry during academic trips, the balance between work and life, the importance of staying connected with friends, and the ongoing debate about online versus in-person conferences. The conversation highlights the multifaceted identity of researchers and the need for flexibility in their professional lives.

In this episode, Sin-Wang discusses the support systems for early career researchers (ECRs) from the perspective of a journal editor. He reflects on the mentorship scheme implemented in his journal, Review of Education, which aims to provide ECRs with hands-on experience in the peer review process. The conversation explores the challenges faced by ECRs, the importance of empowerment in support systems, and the need for cultural shifts within academia to better support the next generation of researchers.   Review of Education: https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/20496613 Scholarly Peers on Substack: https://scholarlypeers.substack.com/  Repository of Early Career Researcher Peer Reviewers: https://forms.gle/kWzPYTMdPCeZwmqK9 

In this episode of Scholarly Peers, host Sin-Wang engages with doctoral student Thomas Stringer from the University of St. Andrews. They discuss Thomas's multifaceted identity as a language lecturer and researcher, his doctoral journey, and the motivations behind his publications. The conversation delves into the peer review process, the challenges of academic writing, and Thomas's new role as a co-editor for an in-house journal. The episode concludes with advice for early-career researchers, emphasising the importance of curiosity and experimentation in academia.   Thomas' publications: Synthesisability and optimising exploratory action research for continuing professional development https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09650792.2024.2362706  A conceptual framework for Emergent Language Learner Autonomy – a complexity perspective for action research https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17501229.2024.2371505    Thomas' websites:  Language Learner Autonomy Research Portal St Andrews Profile  

In this episode, Sin-Wang and Virginia Parker (University of St Andrews) discuss Virginia's experience as a peer reviewer for an international journal. They explore the challenges and benefits of peer review, the importance of being dialogic and relational in feedback, and the role of artificial intelligence in academic writing. Virginia shares her insights on the need for transparency and ethical use of AI in peer review. She also encourages doctoral researchers to embrace the opportunity to engage in peer review and contribute to the scholarly community.    

In this episode, host Sin-Wang interviews Professor David Carless from the University of Hong Kong about his experience in journal peer review. They discuss unforgettable peer review experiences, challenges in navigating the peer review process, and advice for early career researchers. Professor Carless emphasises the importance of starting with realistic journal selection, getting critical peer review before submission, and avoiding premature submission. He also highlights the value of learning from experienced scholars, honing writing skills, and developing emotional resilience in handling rejections.  

Dr. Talia Isaacs shares her experiences in journal peer review as an author, reviewer, and editor. She discusses both positive and challenging experiences, including finding a home for mixed methods research and dealing with disciplinary silos. Talia also provides insights on responding to reviewer feedback on methods and defending decisions. She highlights the importance of transparency in acknowledging the use of AI tools in the writing and research process. Talia offers advice to early career researchers on navigating the peer review process, including being resilient, seeking guidance, and understanding disciplinary practices.  

In this episode, Professor Hayo Reinders, editor of the journal Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, shares his experiences as an author, peer reviewer, and journal editor. He discusses unforgettable peer review experiences, including receiving a scathing review and discovering that his own work had been plagiarised. He also talks about the process of founding a journal and the importance of creating a platform for transformative change. Professor Reinders explores the potential of AI in journal peer review and emphasises the need for support and guidance for early career researchers in navigating the peer review process.    

In this episode, Dr. Caroline Tagg, a senior lecturer and journal editor, shares her experiences as an author, peer reviewer, and editor. She discusses her unforgettable peer review experience as an author, the importance of feedback, and the challenges faced by journal editors. Caroline also provides advice for early career researchers and PhD students on navigating the peer review process.    

In this episode, Professor Masatoshi Sato shares his experiences as an author, peer reviewer, and journal editor. He discusses both negative and positive experiences in the peer review process, including long wait times and constructive feedback. He emphasises the importance of training PhD students in peer review and suggests incorporating peer review into PhD programs. He also provides advice for navigating journal peer review, such as anticipating reviewer comments, working on response letters, and not giving up in the face of rejection.