Chapter 9 Caring reviews
Restricted access

Science can be seen as a very long-standing conversation, following certain rules and principles that impose consistency and stability. The role of the reviewer is to ensure that these standards are upheld and, if possible, to help to developed the text to reach its best potential. Unfortunately, in recent years, reviewing has become something of a powergame with little regard for the good of the text or even common rules of politeness. The chapter proposes a "gallery of horrors": examples of typical bad reviewing drawn from my experience as editor and author. The fundamental condition for an improvement of all elements of the academic culture is a radical rupture with the neoliberal order and its ubiquitous linear mode of organizing. Paternalism can be then replaced with what which Heather Höpfl labels the maternal organization. Whereas the paternal organization is about constructing and hierarchical ordering , the maternal one is focused on development and care.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Other access options

Redeem Token

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institutional Access

Personal login

Log in with your Elgar Online account

Login with you Elgar account
Editor:
Monograph Book