The Language Teacher
06 - 2003
The Editors' Perspective:
An Interview with Two Editors of The Language Teacher
Richard Blight
Ehime University
With The Language Teacher currently undergoing a major process of renewal, we invited two former TLT editors--who still play very active and important roles in TLT--to share their experiences and perspectives on a range of topical issues. First, Malcolm Swanson (currently TLT Online Editor) explains the changes being made to the TLT format.
New Directions of The Language Teacher
RB: Malcolm, could you start by describing the recent changes to the format of The Language Teacher, and explain the reasons for these changes?
MS: The layout has been changed to make navigation easier, and to also give the columns a distinctive look so that they stand out from each other. We've added photos and comments from the editors to give TLT more of a personal touch. Structurally, a new column has also been introduced (TLT Wired), and there may be some more new columns coming later.
We've made the design changes for two reasons. The first is simply that it was time for a change. The current layout has been in place for many years, and even good designs get dated. Secondly, with the change of layout vendors from WordWorks to Pukeko Graphics, rather than the new company trying to duplicate the existing layout, we felt it would be more productive to use the opportunity to upgrade the look of TLT.
RB: I guess a critical factor in these changes has been the requirement to work with reduced budgets, which became apparent last year. Could you talk about the JALT funding situation, and how this has affected The Language Teacher?
MS: All the different areas of JALT have taken a hit in recent years. Chapters and SIGs get significantly less in grants, and the national office budget has been trimmed as well. Likewise JALT's publications have had to cut back their expenses. JALT Journal has reduced page counts, the excellent JALT Applied Materials series is on ice, and TLT has had to reduce page counts and change cover stock to reduce costs.
At this stage, the problem is not so much reducing the cost of producing JALT's publications—as we have succeeding in doing that anyway—but in increasing income. Most of TLT's income is derived from advertising, but with the current economic climate, plus a reduction in the number of ELT-related companies (mostly through takeovers), we've seen big drops in revenue. TLT's challenge is going to be in attracting more revenue, possibly from a more diverse range of vendors.
RB: Could you also explain how the production costs have been reduced, particularly on account of the scale of the reductions that were being contested last year? And have the editors been required to implement major changes as a consequence of the financial situation?
MS: I think the editors have their hands full with just producing TLT each month, and hats off to them for managing to maintain production and quality during "the troubles" last year. As TLT Assistant Editor, Paul Lewis, often states, not many people realize that TLT is the world's only monthly, refereed language education journal, and if it was ever reduced in frequency or content from what it is now, JALT loses something very unique. TLT is JALT's face . . . it's what EVERY member receives as part of his or her membership package. I think when every member looks at the 10,000 yen they pay annually, this is something concrete they can see as a return for that.
Still, with the financial realities facing JALT, steps have had to be taken, and recently these have included two big items for reducing costs. The first has been a process of competitive bidding for JALT's printing and layout work—as opposed to the old system of simply selecting a vendor. This was recently concluded, with Pukeko Graphics being awarded the layout contract and Koshinsha Printing getting the print contract. Secondly, JALT Central Office recently finished arrangements for fourth-class postage rates, which will almost halve distribution costs. It's too early to say exactly what the total savings will be from these measures, but they will be in the millions!
RB: That's good news! And as you said, implementing cost reductions is just one aspect of the editors' work. Most JALT members probably also don't want to see major quality sacrifices introduced. Yet it must be difficult to meet the conflicting requirements of budget constraints and production quality?
MS: Yes, this is always an issue, and it formed the basis of much of our resistance to the cuts last year. At the time we stated that, while we understood the need to reduce costs, we felt that we were the most qualified to do this—kind of a "give us a budget and let us do it" approach. The advantage with Pukeko Graphics taking the layout contract is that, not only is it going to save JALT significant money, but it means the work is being done by a company very familiar with the editorial needs of the publication, and as JALT members themselves, being committed to the health of the organization. A nice symbiosis. As it stands this year, TLT and JJ can be produced with quality being maintained, while still saving millions in production costs.
RB: A TLT readership survey conducted several years ago revealed the diverse interests of the JALT community (Swanson, 2000). So your comment at that time is likely to be just as relevant today: "It's impossible for us to please every reader, every time . . . but we sincerely hope to give all readers something of interest in every issue" (p. 6).
MS: JALT has always been synonymous with diversity—go to any Executive Board Meeting and you'll see this in practice! Our readers are just as diverse, and it would be impossible to satisfy every reader. However, TLT has always strived to cover the field, and if you flip through past issues, you'll see how wide an offering TLT provides. The unfortunate reality is that, like any publication, TLT is dependent on submissions for material. As editor in 2000-2001, I sometimes received comments that TLT was too tertiary-oriented and should cater to other groups. The answer to that is simple—it does cater to every language-learning area, but it can only publish what it gets. I know the current editors would be delighted to receive material on areas that receive little coverage currently.
RB: You made the same point in the survey analysis, that the editors had received substantially fewer submissions from non-university educators and other major interest groups. Has this situation changed, and can the editors do anything to increase representation from other interest groups?
MS: Some, but not much, unfortunately. It's an understandable reality. Tertiary educators have the time and incentives to publish . . . teachers of children or teachers in language schools do not. We've run a number of SIG-related issues, and these have worked well, but trying to keep the momentum rolling on them is difficult. Some work was begun on a column or special issue for language-school teachers, but I'm not sure if that went anywhere.
RB: TLT, JALT Journal, and the various SIG publications each fulfill complementary roles in providing a professional profile to the JALT organization. So for the TLT editors, does maintaining a relevant content focus remain both the primary purpose and the key to broad scale acceptance?
MS: TLT's "broad scale acceptance" is reliant on a couple of issues: that readers find articles of interest to them and contribute articles or opinions of their own, or that they find news, notices, information, and reports that are relevant to them as members, and contribute their own. The current dilemma TLT faces is the belief that the publication is simply a service provided for members. Yes, it is that, but it should be more. Maintaining a "relevant content focus" is part of what TLT is, but more than that, TLT is a framework or outlet that a volunteer team of around 30 people maintains for members to use. I hear the occasional comment that "I seldom bother reading TLT because there's nothing in it for me." My response is: Have you actually read it? (Surprisingly, the answer is often "No.") What would you like to see? Have you told the editors what your needs are? Have you contributed anything yourself? Personally, I think TLT does a very credible job of covering the ground between a formal research journal and specialised publications. But, there's always room for more.
RB: Another finding of the readership survey was that: "TLT's online presence should be developed" (p. 6). Could you describe the work currently being done on the TLT website in relation to the concept of developing an "online presence," and explain how this will benefit JALT members?
MS: I started with TLT about 8 years ago. At that time, we did all our editing and proofing with hard copy mailed and faxed around the country. Now, TLT is totally electronic, and we do everything by email or online delivery. We have a "virtual staffroom" where we post notices, view schedules, and read production manuals. That's our "online presence" behind the scenes.
Our plan is to bring a similar experience to our readers. With the site averaging around 3,000 hits from about 240 visitors a day, it's obvious that it has a lot of appeal to both members and researchers. This year, we are committed to having the online version of TLT echo the printed version—as a service to our members. We have already password protected the site so that it is available to members only, and we are currently developing an in-site search engine that will be a powerful research tool. Other planned projects for this year include archiving material from JALT Journal, JALT Applied Materials, and JALT's Conference Proceedings.
You can also expect to see a tighter integration between the website and the printed TLT: opinion articles linked to online forums to discuss any issues raised; feature articles linked to online resource pages for follow-up; columns with their own web spaces for browsing or submitting material. I guess that in the future we can expect to see TLT move to an e-zine format for online delivery only, but that's a way off yet. People still like to hold paper, and writers definitely prefer a printed article. And, believe it or not, there are members still out there with no computer or Internet access. As the website grows, I feel the printed version will develop into a portal to an extended resource online. This is good news for members. They will still receive a TLT containing articles and news they need, but through the online version, they will be able to explore their areas of interest more fully.
RB: Malcolm, thank you for sharing your experience and insights with the TLT community.
Getting Published in The Language Teacher
In this second part, Robert Long (TLT Editorial Advisory Board) discusses common problem areas in article submissions.
RB: Robert, could you first describe the review process, which commences when an article is submitted to the editors?
RL: Usually, I received an article as an email attachment (highly recommended as hard copy slows up the process enormously). I would then go through the article, and this could take anywhere from a few days to two weeks, depending on how many submissions have come in, if I was working on a special issue on top of the regular submissions, and my own class schedule. I next decide whether to send the paper on to two reviewers, who would take around four weeks to analyze it and give feedback. Based on their feedback, and my own second thoughts, I then either accept or reject the submission. Usually, there is also some need for revision, and this generally takes authors one or two weeks to complete. Then, I go through the paper once again, to see if the necessary revisions have been done, edit it, and make sure it follows APA guidelines before sending it on to layout. Keep in mind that we work two to three months in advance; many people feel that once their article is accepted, it will show up in the next TLT.
RB: Do contributors generally follow the submission guidelines?
RL: Usually, contributors have difficulty in following the APA format, and most tend to forget the 3,000-word limit for featured articles, and the 2,500 words for Readers' Forum articles.
RB: Are many papers accepted directly, without requiring any form of revision? How many revisions are usually required for the other papers?
RL: I don't think I have ever had an article that wasn't revised in some way. Almost always, one set of revisions does the trick.
RB: Writers might sometimes not agree with the reviewers' comments and suggestions for improving their paper. Sandra McKay (the past Editor of TESOL Quarterly) talked of the need for authors to get some personal distance on the writing process, and to try to be as objective as possible about the reviewers' criticisms (Cornwell, 1998). What advice would you give in such circumstances?
RL: Yes, writing is a very personal thing. I have had my share of upset authors who disagreed with my comments or with those of the reviewers. The best way to get some personal distance is to view the editors and the reviewers as your "friends," who are giving you the advice that you really need to hear. A second thing is to focus yourself more on the "process" of writing instead of so much on the "product" (getting an article published). If you value the process more than the product, then you will get a lot more out of it, and it will be more enjoyable. There is no sense of "killing yourself" to get a few articles published.
RB: The evaluation criteria used by TLT reviewers refer to the "suitability for TLT readership," and the "relevance of problem addressed" (Swanson, Long, & Jungheim, 2001). Did you often receive papers that were of publishable quality, but that were unsuitable in the content area?
RL: Most of these papers tend to be a direct take-off of the author's master's thesis. I have received a number of these, and the problem is that the writer makes no attempt whatsoever to follow the guidelines, or to make the article truly relevant to Japanese EFL or to have a more practical focus to it.
RB: But how is it possible to determine the relevance of a paper to a community of readers? Could you give an example of unsuitable content?
RL: In one case, I received a paper comparing the Turkish language to Japanese. Besides not following the guidelines and being straight out of some master's thesis, I made the determination that it was better suited to the JALT Journal. Also, as there is not a large Turkish element in English language education here in Japan, I thought it wasn't the best article to go ahead with. But, you are right, the issue of "interesting" reading is one that is always in the back of my mind. The best way is to show in one's introduction and conclusion how your findings (and topic) are really important to most EFL teachers. If you have a hard time showing this, then this is one area that you might want to concentrate on more.
RB: What were some common problems that you encountered in the academic standard of submissions?
RL: Usually, there is the issue of thoroughly understanding the theory, problems, and the data. Most writers tend to give a superficial analysis of the problem, and treatment of the literature. A review of literature is not a cut-and-paste quotation process, but a critical review of the more relevant literature to your study. It should also point out a problem or gap (most writers fail to do this). Writing style also tends to be colloquial.
RB: There are many difficulties in conducting quality research projects. Do you have any suggestions for improving the way that research is often undertaken?
RL: The best way is to first identify a really interesting problem that is important. Then, think about the logistics of your study. Take a long look at your goals and ask these questions: How many people will need to be interviewed, or surveyed? How long will this take? How many people can you count on to cooperate? How will you triangulate the research? Once you get these questions answered, before you begin, then you are halfway home. I think too many people get halfway through a study, and realize that it can't be finished, or it will take a lot longer to finish.
RB: What are some new trends in research, which might be relevant to TLT readers? And do these trends improve the quality of the research?
RL: This is a good question, but frankly, I don't see any "trends" other than more writers discussing attitudes and motivation. Unfortunately, the quality of research seems to have declined over the past three years that I have been involved in the TLT. This might relate to the quality of education that teachers are getting in the research classes in their graduate courses. A second problem is that it does take a LOT of time to get the sufficient number of subjects for a serious study. Writers often tend to use just their own classes. Another issue is that of really reviewing the literature. Most writers don't take the time to go over the 20 to 30 odd articles in their subject areas, and to identify a real problem that is both relevant and interesting to the EFL community.
RB: What advice would you give to readers doing formal study programs, who may be considering submitting their M.A. assignments to TLT?
RL: Take a long look at your research study, and summarize only those things that the reader needs to know. Then get five people who are not your friends to give you some serious feedback on your draft. Go through and rewrite two or three times before submitting it.
RB: Do you have any other suggestions for readers wishing to get published in TLT?
RL: I would like to tell potential contributors to look at what has already been published in the TLT before writing an article. I think that there is a real need for articles relating to video, CALL, psycholinguistics, cross-cultural interactions, intralingual and interlanguage errors to name just a few. Come up with some ideas for a study and see which ones interest teachers the most before starting. When you finish, try not to give an unduly glowing account of your findings, instead keep a balanced and objective distance to what you really discovered in your study, and its value to the EFL community.
RB: Robert, thank you very much for this interview with The Language Teacher.
References
Cornwell, S. (1998). Advice for writers: An interview with Sandra McKay. The Language Teacher, 22(10), 13-15.
Swanson, M. (2000). What is The Language Teacher? TLT readership survey results and analysis. The Language Teacher, 24(4), 3-6.
Swanson, M., Long, R., & Jungheim, N. (2001, November). Getting published in JALT. Presentation given at the 27th Annual International Conference on Language Teaching, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Richard Blight is Associate Professor at the English Education Center, Ehime University. He has worked in the tertiary sector in Japan for four years, and prior to this taught ESL for two years in the tertiary and further education sectors in Australia. He commenced his TESOL career as an English teacher in a private language school in Adelaide, and subsequently worked for three years as an ALT on the JET Programme. He has been President of JALT Matsuyama for the past two years, as well as Editor of the Chapter Reports column of The Language Teacher.
All materials on this site are copyright © by JALT and their respective authors.
For more information on JALT, visit the JALT National Website