Thanks for the comments and ideas

Thanks to everyone who commented on the proposal by Dariush to make some interesting changes to the LPP editorial board. I'm getting caught up after the holidays, and I want to post a response that incorporates my ideas and those of the commenters on the last post. Gail and I haven't had a chance to really discuss this yet, so we may either post one response or respond separately.

Here is the second proposal from Dariush. It would give the Editorial Board more involvement, and help make LPP more visible and accessible to more people. Gail and I are very enthusiastic about this idea and the proposal to recruit international LIS faculty as reviewers and authors.

We think that LPP should form a three layer editorial board. You and Gail form the highest level in editorial activities and rename yourself as "Chief Editors". The current "Editorial Board" should be renamed to "Editorial Advisory Board" in order to shape the second class of editors that advise chief editors both in accepting or rejecting received articles and offering new professionals for membership in editorial board. The third level that should be named "International Editorial Board" comprises of any volunteer reviewer that is interested in serving the journal freely. A volunteer can send his/her request regarding the membership + a copy of his/her resume to the chief editors and you will have the authority to accept or reject the application. Through adopting such a policy, the LPP will be more introduced and identified throughout the world, would attract more authors and reviewers to have scientific collaboration with the journal, will receive more qualitative submissions from students, practitioners, and tutors, and finally will play a more important role in scientific
development of the human. How do you see this proposal?

We would like to hear thoughts and ideas from Board members about this proposal.

Hello, Everyone!

I'd like to revive our LPP Editorial Board blog with two very interesting things to discuss. Dariush Alimohammadi wrote to me this week to suggest that LPP reach out to LIS schools outside North America to recruit faculty there as peer reviewers and authors. Here is Dariush's suggestion:

Also, we think that some type of scientific collaboration should be established between the LPP editorial board and LIS Departments/Schools all over the world. Through sending regular emails, LPP should try to encourage LIS and other adjunct faculties to submit their new writings and to be ready for reviewing as a volunteer.

Gail and I are very enthusiastic about this idea and would like to hear the Board's thoughts and reactions. I would also like to have suggestions about where to start in compiling a list of LIS Schools, i.e., which region or country, which schools are largest or most active, etc.

I am using Google Reader to subscribe to an RSS feed for this blog, so I will easily know when someone has posted.

I will post Dariush's second proposal in a separate message.

Citation style

I would like to follow up on the suggestion that we adopt a particular citation style (or offer a couple of options to authors.) I'm most familiar with APA, and many authors use that style. MLA is the style I prefer personally, because I think it's useful to include complete first names for authors.

I would like to revise the instructions for authors and ask them to use APA or MLA. I will also ask them to include an abstract, because we need one, and most authors are not supplying one, although quite a few do.

Thoughts on citation style? I'm happy to go with the will of the group on this one.

New reviewing form for manuscripts

Hello!

Dariush Alimohammadi has proposed a new reviewing form for LPP manuscripts. It is more detailed than the current form. Parts of it are adapted from forms used by other journals, in various disciplines. Gail and I have talked about it, and we think it is a good idea and we should try it. I will e-mail the new form to everyone. I think we might be able to use both the simpler form that we now use and the new, more detailed one. The detailed form might be especially useful when an article has problems, or does not quite fit within LPP's scope.

Thanks, Dariush!

Reviewers for special issue

We have received eleven submissions for the special issue on libraries and google from the guest editors Jill Cirasella and Mariana Regalado. Those papers must now go through the peer review process. Please respond here or by e-mail if you would be willing to review one of those papers. They are on many different topics, including website design, the open source model, the web as a cataloging resource, reference, resource sharing, social software and socially-driven authority, and so on.

Volunteers? Please get back to me by next Friday, January 12. The deadline for reviewing the article is February 15 (more or less).

Thanks!

Happy New Year to everyone.

I had a very good suggestion from Alessia Zanin-Yost, which is to begin requiring LPP submissions to use a particular citation style. APA and MLA have been suggested. I would like to have a style that uses in-text citation rather than footnotes or endnotes, and MLA and APA both use in-text with "Works Cited" at the end of the article. Any ideas, preferences, or suggestions?

Thanks.

Wish you all Happy New year 2007 !!




















Dr. J K Vijayakumar