HomePublicationsOpen Access SeriesWriting about Learning and Teaching in Higher EducationPart 6 Chapter 28: Responding to Reviewers and Dealing with RejectionDownload Chapter Book MenuWriting about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education SectionsPart 1Part 2Part 3Part 4Part 5Part 6ChaptersChapter 1Chapter 2Chapter 3Chapter 4Chapter 5Chapter 6Chapter 7Chapter 8Chapter 9Chapter 10Chapter 11Chapter 12Chapter 13Chapter 14Chapter 15Chapter 16Chapter 17Chapter 18Chapter 19Chapter 20Chapter 21Chapter 22Chapter 23Chapter 24Chapter 25Chapter 26Chapter 27Chapter 28Chapter 29Chapter 30About the Authors Book Resources Book Reviews Download BookOpen access PDFdoi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa3ISBN: 978-1-951414-04-7September 20202.6 MBMetrics: 22995 views | 8796 downloadsISBN: 978-1-951414-05-4September 2020 (Temporarily Unavailable) Chapter 28 illustrates the peer-review process as a dialogue between colleagues—an exchange that shapes us and that we can, in turn, shape. This chapter addresses ways to make sense of reviewer comments, offers suggestions for revising your work and responding to editors, and addresses how to deal with rejection. Related Book Resources Template for Writing Reviews [PDF] Example of a Review Using the Template [PDF] Example of Response to Reviewers [PDF] Discussion QuestionsIn making sense of reviewers’ comments, a key step is reading across the reviews to understand: How do you think you will respond to a rejection decision? Whom in your support network can you contact if you get a rejection decision? If revisions are requested, what changes are reviewers arguing for in your work? Are any of these requested changes at odds? Do any overlap? Then you may want to decide a few things for yourself and with any co-authors: Can you see how making the suggested changes will enhance your paper? Are some requests moving the work in a direction you are not comfortable with? Are some requests unclear to you? Do some requests seem irrelevant, because you have addressed them elsewhere in the paper or because the requests are more comments rather than suggested changes, for example? How, and to what extent, will you retain the integrity of your text while also responding to the reviewers’ comments? Share:
