Our publications include articles about topics associated with coaching, peer assistance, and mentorship. Many additional topics relate to these three key areas or can contribute to more fully understanding the foundation for or practice of any of these topics. We also include articles about trends and issues, announcements regarding opportunities (typically workshops, seminars, conferences, or employment); however, these must be obviously related or relevant to the three key topic areas.
In certain circumstances we will accept articles about products or services; however, the product or the service being described must be secondary to the point, issue or trend being emphasized in the article.
Members of the Peer Resources Network can submit reports about their work, service or product. Information about products or services of persons who are not members of the Peer Resources Network will unlikely be accepted for publication unless a compelling reason is included.
We typically do not accept promotional pieces, testimonials, or press releases, unless they fulfill the requirements as stated above.
We do not accept advertising.
Contributors are not paid for their work. Depending on which publication is involved they may receive complimentary copies of the issue in which their contribution appears. Typically, full contact information for the author(s) as well as brief biographical information is provided along with the article.
If your interest in our publications comes from a desire to use or recruit our members and subscribers as possible participants in survey research, please examine our Research Request Guidelines prior to contacting our editors.
Peer Resources holds the copyright to all material included in each issue of every publication. Contributors may request permission to re-publish or distribute any of their items that have appeared in a Peer Resources publication. Requests must be in writing. Email requests are acceptable.
We prefer articles written exclusively for our publications. Should a contributor submit an article that has been previously published elsewhere, the contributor must include with the article a statement from the copyright holder that provides permission to Peer Resources to reprint (or adapt as necessary) without any financial claim.
If a submission includes copyrighted material from sources other than the writer, then permission must be obtained in writing by the writer and forwarded with the submission. Lengthy quotations from other published sources are discouraged and instead the content or meaning should be summarized or succinctly stated by the writer. (Lengthy quotations from informal or non-published sources can be included.)
In general, articles should be simply written. Sentences should be short.
When more than 15 percent of your words (except verbs and proper nouns) are three or more syllables, readers work too hard to understand your message.
Keep at least 75 percent of your sentences an average length of 10-20 words. If a sentence is longer than three typed lines, consider shortening it.
Keep at least 75 percent of your paragraphs one to three sentences long. If a paragraph is more than five typed lines, consider shortening it.
Choose original ways of writing your message, avoiding well-known phrases or cliches.
Avoid the use of jargon whenever possible. This type of language or terminology will serve only to confuse readers who may be unfamiliar with your field of study.
Avoid starting a sentence or clause with "It" unless the pronoun has a clear antecedent.
Avoid starting sentences with "There" to prevent the use of empty introductory language.
Favor the active voice over the passive voice to avoid vagueness unless the action is more important than the doer of the action.
After you've written your text, evaluate every sentence by asking yourself: "Why is this particular piece of information important to my readers?" If you cannot answer the question adequately about a sentence, consider deleting it.
The length of any article can vary. Articles submitted for publication in our monthly newsletters, however, should not be longer than 1200 words. The average length of articles in our monthly publications is 250-350 words.
As much as possible the practical applications or value of any idea should be emphasized. Readers like guidance about what they can do as a result of reading an article. In addition, writers should emphasize what they have learned. Theoretical articles are worthwhile and must be persuasive as to why such an article is of value to practitioners.
Articles of a personal nature must be in first person style. Quotes from sources are encouraged and should include information about how to contact the source. The source can be an email address, URL, or book title, for example. Where possible, additional information, contact details or links should be included.
Peer Resources reserves the right to edit, modify or revise any submission in order to meet the style, continuity, and integrity of its publication standards. Authors interested in these standards can access them by reading through past copies of any Peer Resources' publication. Authors will receive drafts of an edited manuscript prior to publication unless a prior agreement is in force.
If references and footnotes are to be included in the submission, they must be formatted in the style of the Publications Manual (5th Edition) of the American Psychological Association (APA). Any book, article, website, or personal communication, etc. referred to or cited in the article must be described using the APA style guide. (An online source for the APA guide is: http://www.apastyle.org/.)
Proper citation or attribution is essential. Where the source of an idea, point or perspective originates from a work other than the contributor's and even if that specific source is "unknown" or "anonymous," the contributor should indicate such and provide as much detail as necessary for a reader to locate the original source.
Peer Resources reserves the right to determine in which issue or which publication any contributor submission will be published. Submissions must not be under consideration for publication in any other source. In all cases decisions regarding publication acceptance are the exclusive responsibility of the senior editorial staff at Peer Resources.
Articles specifically submitted for or solicited for publication in the Peer Bulletin are reviewed by the editorial staff of the magazine and by a group of peer reviewers (McCook, 2006) prior to acceptance for publication. This process may take a considerable amount of time. Periodic progress reports are provided to potential authors.
Authors of articles or material not accepted for publication will be informed in a timely manner.
Formal Agreement or Contract
We don't use any formal agreements. But I will ask similar questions during email correspondence regarding a submission. At present, I know most of the writers or get to know them through editing their submission, so we've never had any difficulty with mis-understanding. The only problem we've ever had is stating that a particular submission will appear by a certain date and then not being able to live up to the date (for many reasons, including doesn't fit with the mix of articles, proofreading delays, printer screw-ups, etc.).
The Mentor News (http://www.mentors.ca/thementornews.html), a free, text-based ezine, distributed every 90-120 days (back issues are archived in HTML).
The Peer News (http://www.peer.ca/thepeernews.html), a free, text-based ezine, distributed every 90-120 days (back issues are archived in HTML).
The Coaching News (http://www.peer.ca/thecoachingnews.html), a free, text-based ezine distributed every 90-120 days (back issues are archived in HTML).
The Peer Bulletin, (http://www.peer.ca/bulletinsample.html) a subscriber only e-zine, distributed monthly (back issues are archived and only available to members of the Peer Resources Network).
All manuscripts, ideas for manuscripts or other requests for information should be sent to:
Rey A. Carr, Ph.D., Senior Editor
1052 Davie Street
Victoria, BC V8S 4E3
AccreditedOnline (October 13, 2011). How peer review at top-tier journals is flawed. AcceditedOnline Colleges Blog. (Retrieved November 26, 2011 from www.accreditedonlinecolleges.com/blog/2011/how-peer-review-at-top-tier-journals-is-flawed/).
McCook, A. (February, 2006). Is peer review broken? The Scientist Magazine of the Life Sciences, 20, 2, 26. (Retrieved November 28, 2011 from classic.the-scientist.com).
Salisbury, M.W. (November, 2009). Is peer review broken? Genomeweb. (Retrieved November 10, 2010 from www.genomeweb.com/peer-review-broken).