About a month ago I submitted an article to an international journal that I thought might be appropriate. Unfortunately I didn’t pay enough attention to the scope of the journal, which ultimately is why the paper was rejected. Having your work rejected is always disappointing but not always a bad thing. The letter I received in response from the editor was in some sense motivational and I reproduce it below:
“Thank you for submitting your manuscript to [journal name]. Although I read your manuscript with interest, I am sorry to say that it falls outside the scope of the journal. A quote from the aims and scope of the journal: “From the perspective of external validity, it is critical that authors place their study in a theoretical and empirical context. [Journal name] has no page limit, in order that each paper can be accompanied by a critical review of related research, and the discussion can highlight how the study findings add to knowledge. Authors are encouraged to explore their study from multiple analytical perspectives, to include multiple converging studies if possible, and to specifically state how the study findings add to knowledge in the field. Again, from the perspective of educational importance, studies of a single course or program with weak evidence of effectiveness, such as student ratings, are discouraged as they are unlikely to add to generalizable knowledge, unless the study permits empirical test of theoretical predictions.”
The outcomes of your study are based on students preferences or wishes. There are no data from other sources. There is nothing wrong with that kind of study. Doing research however is more than answering questions on how well you like or do certain things. We all know that generalizations from this kind of research are difficult, to say the least. Author guidelines for [journal name] explicitly state that we will not consider studies where the only outcome is persons opinion or perception.
Please understand me well. This is not a bad story. The study is conducted very well. The methodology used is sound. The study will certainly contribute to more insight. In addition, it is nicely written. However, [journal name] is a global journal and our readers are interested in educational theories: how they advance learning.
We receive more papers than we can accept. At this moment I send less than 50% of the submitted manuscripts out for review. This means that we have to take difficult decisions based on originality, importance and academic rigor. I am sorry we cannot find space for your paper.
Thank you for considering [journal name]”
I couldn’t go back and rewrite the article within the context of a theoretical framework, as the study hadn’t been designed with that in mind, and I don’t like the idea of trying to force an idea into something it was never meant to be. So, I looked around for another journal, found one that I thought was more appropriate and re-submitted.
What I learned through this experience was:
- Make sure that I submit to the right journal (It’s difficult to decide what “right” means in this sense)
- Having an article rejected doesn’t mean it doesn’t have any value
- Every writing experience should also be a learning experience
- Publishing research results is a process, and each step in the process has potential to inform your next publication
I now have the goal of embedding my research results within a theoretical framework, insofar as this possible within the scope of the article. This has already paid off in terms of pushing me to design stronger methods from the outset, which can only be a good thing.