The Conference Review Process

This presentation is for students on the 3rd year ECS Multimedia course where students run their own conference, and submit and review papers. In this presentation we explain the academic review process, look at the structure of a review, and give some examples of positive and negative reviews.

Revising a Conference Paper

This presentation is for students on the 3rd year ECS Multimedia course where students run their own conference, and submit and review papers. In this presentation we explain how to interpret reviews, find underlying problems, and make changes that will address them.

Proceedings of the West Africa Built Environment Research (WABER) Conference 2010

FOREWORD Welcome to this West Africa Built Environment Research (WABER) conference taking place here in Ghana. Thank you for coming and welcome to Accra. The main aims of the WABER conference are: to help young researchers and early-career scholars in West Africa to develop their research work and skills through constructive face-to-face interaction with experienced academics; to provide a platform for networking and collaborative work among senior built environment academics in West Africa; and to serve as a vehicle for developing the field of construction management and economics in Africa. Waber 2009 The WABER event in 2009 was held at the British Council in Accra, Ghana on 2-3 June. The event was a resounding success. It attracted participation from 32 researchers, from 12 different institutions, who presented their work to an audience of approximately 100 people. Each presenter received immediate and constructive feedback from an international panel. The event was opened by Professor K.K. Adarkwa, Vice Chancellor of KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana, with several senior academics and researchers from universities, polytechnics, and other institutions in Ghana and Nigeria in attendance. There was also a significant level of attendance by senior construction practitioners in Ghana. Thank you to the School of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, UK for funding the inaugural event in 2009. We are also grateful to all of you who helped to make the event a success and to those of you who have joined us here today to build upon the success and legacy of WABER 2009. Waber 2010 This year, we have 60+ peer-reviewed papers and presentations on topics relating to Building services and maintenance, Construction costs, Construction design and technology, Construction education, Construction finance, Construction procurement, Contract administration, Contract management, Contractor development, Decision support systems, Dispute resolution, Economic development, Energy efficiency, Environment and sustainability, Health and safety, Human resources, Information technology, Marketing, Materials science, Organisation strategy and business performance, Productivity, Project management, Quantity surveying, Real estate and planning, Solar energy systems, Supply chain management and Urban development. We hope that these papers will generate interest among delagates and stimulate discussion here and beyond the conference into the wider community of academia and industry. The delegates at this conference come from 10 different countries. This provides a rich international and multicultural blend and a perfect platform for networking and developing collaborations. This year we are blessed to have three high profile keynote speakers in the persons of Professor George Ofori (National University of Singapore), Dr Roine Leiringer (University of Reading, UK) and Professor Will Hughes (University of Reading, UK). We are also thankful to Dr Chris Harty (University of Reading, UK) who is facilitating the Research Skills Workshop on ‘Writing a scientific article’. Thank you to Dr Sena Agyepong of our conference organising team for her capable management of local organising arrangements. And above all, thank you to all of you for coming to this conference. Enjoy and have a safe journey back home. Dr Samuel Laryea School of Construction Management and Engineering University of Reading, July 2010

Proceedings of the inaugural construction management and economics ‘Past, Present and Future’ conference CME25, 16-18 July 2007, University of Reading, UK

This conference was an unusual and interesting event. Celebrating 25 years of Construction Management and Economics provides us with an opportunity to reflect on the research that has been reported over the years, to consider where we are now, and to think about the future of academic research in this area. Hence the sub-title of this conference: “past, present and future”. Looking through these papers, some things are clear. First, the range of topics considered interesting has expanded hugely since the journal was first published. Second, the research methods are also more diverse. Third, the involvement of wider groups of stakeholder is evident. There is a danger that this might lead to dilution of the field. But my instinct has always been to argue against the notion that Construction Management and Economics represents a discipline, as such. Granted, there are plenty of university departments around the world that would justify the idea of a discipline. But the vast majority of academic departments who contribute to the life of this journal carry different names to this. Indeed, the range and breadth of methodological approaches to the research reported in Construction Management and Economics indicates that there are several different academic disciplines being brought to bear on the construction sector. Some papers are based on economics, some on psychology and others on operational research, sociology, law, statistics, information technology, and so on. This is why I maintain that construction management is not an academic discipline, but a field of study to which a range of academic disciplines are applied. This may be why it is so interesting to be involved in this journal. The problems to which the papers are applied develop and grow. But the broad topics of the earliest papers in the journal are still relevant today. What has changed a lot is our interpretation of the problems that confront the construction sector all over the world, and the methodological approaches to resolving them. There is a constant difficulty in dealing with topics as inherently practical as these. While the demands of the academic world are driven by the need for the rigorous application of sound methods, the demands of the practical world are quite different. It can be difficult to meet the needs of both sets of stakeholders at the same time. However, increasing numbers of postgraduate courses in our area result in larger numbers of practitioners with a deeper appreciation of what research is all about, and how to interpret and apply the lessons from research. It also seems that there are contributions coming not just from construction-related university departments, but also from departments with identifiable methodological traditions of their own. I like to think that our authors can publish in journals beyond the construction-related areas, to disseminate their theoretical insights into other disciplines, and to contribute to the strength of this journal by citing our articles in more mono-disciplinary journals. This would contribute to the future of the journal in a very strong and developmental way. The greatest danger we face is in excessive self-citation, i.e. referring only to sources within the CM&E literature or, worse, referring only to other articles in the same journal. The only way to ensure a strong and influential position for journals and university departments like ours is to be sure that our work is informing other academic disciplines. This is what I would see as the future, our logical next step. If, as a community of researchers, we are not producing papers that challenge and inform the fundamentals of research methods and analytical processes, then no matter how practically relevant our output is to the industry, it will remain derivative and secondary, based on the methodological insights of others. The balancing act between methodological rigour and practical relevance is a difficult one, but not, of course, a balance that has to be struck in every single paper.

Refereed journal papers: practice and process

Research must be published, otherwise it will be lost. The most important papers for a researcher to produce are those published in international refereed journals. Good practice in writing papers is something that can be learned. The editorial process involves sending submitted papers to independent experts in the field, usually anonymously, and their comments inform the editor, who decides whether and how to progress with a paper. Much of this is as obscure to experienced researchers as it is to new ones. With forethought and planning, the success rate of getting submitted papers accepted for publication can be increased. Editors and publishers are generally very keen to help people improve their success rate.

Facts, scope, style: a guide to writing papers for IEEE transactions on consumer electronics

In a previous article, I wrote a brief piece on how to enhance papers that have been published at one of the IEEE Consumer Electronics (CE) Society conferences to create papers that can be considered for publishing in IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics (T-CE) [1]. Basically, it included some hints and tips to enhance a conference paper into what is required for a full archival journal paper and not fall foul of self-plagiarism. This article focuses on writing original papers specifically for T-CE. After three years as the journal’s editor-in-chief (EiC), a previous eight years on the editorial board, and having reviewed some 4,000 T-CE papers, I decided to write this article to archive and detail for prospective authors what I have learned over this time. Of course, there are numerous articles on writing good papers—some are really useful [2], but they do not address the specific issues of writing for a journal whose topic (scope) is not widely understood or, indeed, is often misunderstood.

Mary E. Frayser Papers - Accession 1

The Mary E. Frayser Papers consists of correspondence, speeches, reports, clippings, minutes, histories, family histories, constitutions and bylaws, membership lists, program notes, photographs, and other papers, relating to her work with the South Carolina Extension Service (1912-1940) Winthrop College, her involvement with the South Carolina Council for the Common Good (1935-1952), the South Carolina Federation of Women’s Clubs (1926-1952), the South Carolina Status of Women Conference (1945-1952), the South Carolina Division of the American Association of University Women (AAUW) (1929, 1935-1949), the South Carolina Interracial Institute (1938-1942), the South Carolina Division of the Southern Regional Council (1944-1951), and the South Carolina Conference of Social Work (1936-1967). There are also papers relating to Frayser’s efforts to promote social and economic legislation and participation by women in public affairs and her interest in libraries and work in the movement for the support of public libraries in South Carolina (1925-1968). Correspondents included G.H. Aault, Evan Chesterman, Wil Lou Gray, Sarah Hughes, Christine South Gee, and Maude Massey Rogers. This collection is a good source of women’s club activities in the twentieth century. Important areas of research would include the way club activity affected social and economic legislation in the state and the various forces involved in the movement for state tax supported libraries. While the papers do range from 1841 to 1953, the greater bulk of the papers extend from the early 1930s to about 1947. Since the work of the various women's club organizations were so inter-related, a researcher working with the papers of a particular organization for a particular time span should consider the Frayser papers of all other organizations. The related papers for the “Correspondence and Related Papers” series for particular organizations are generally similar and include: memoranda, outlines, reports, resolutions, minutes, etc. Additional Frayser information can be found by referring to the Winthrop University Archives (official records).

Martha Frances Morgan Papers - Accession 33

The Martha Francis Morgan Papers includes teaching aids, reading lists and tests relating to her teaching; together with constitutions, correspondence, photographs, program notes, and newspaper clippings concerning her involvement with the many clubs and organizations in which she participated.

Roberta London Papers - Accession 844

The collection includes personal photographs, newspaper clippings, pamphlets, research and information on specific foods, recipes, drafts and published editions of manuscripts, class notes and student files. There is also information concerning the American Dietetic Association, the South Carolina Dietetic Association, the Piedmont Dietetic Association, the American Home Economics Association, and the South Carolina Home Economics Association, including conference material, memos, and correspondence. Miss London was president of the South Carolina Dietetic Association in 1967.

Thelma Ecord Busbee Papers - Accession 29

Thelma Ecord Busbee (1910-2004) was a Civic leader and club woman from Columbia, South Carolina. The Thelma Ecord Busbee Papers consist of correspondence, reports, constitutions, financial records, program notes, and other papers relating to her many club and civic activities. The collection covers the South Carolina Federation of Women’s Clubs (1950-1959), The South Carolina Status of Women’s Conference (1961-1968), the Richland-Lexington Tuberculosis Association (1961-1964), South Carolina Alert, Inc. (1961-1962), the Palmetto Outdoor Historical Drama Association (1965-1968), the South Carolina State Library Board (1967-1968), the Lexington County Hospital Auxiliary (1970-1972), and the South Carolina Council for the Common Good (1966).

OPENING REMARKS - THIRD VERTEBRATE PEST CONFERENCE

To open this Third Vertebrate Pest Conference is a real privilege. It is a pleasure to welcome all of you in attendance, and I know there are others who would like to be meeting with us, but, for one reason or another cannot be. However, we can serve them by taking back the results of discussion and by making available the printed transactions of what is said here. It has been the interest and demand for the proceedings of the two previous conferen- ces which, along with personal contacts many of you have with the sponsoring committee, have gauged the need for continuing these meetings. The National Pest Control Association officers who printed the 1962 proceedings still are supplying copies of that conference. Two reprintings of the 1964 conference have been necessary and repeat orders from several universities indicate that those proceedings have become textbooks for special classes. When Dr. Howard mentioned in opening the first Conference in 1962 that publication of those papers would make a valuable handbook of animal control, he was prophetic, indeed. We are pleased that this has happened, but not surprised, since to many of us in this specialized field, the conferences have provided a unique opportunity to meet colleagues with similar interests, to exchange information on control techniques and to be informed by research workers of problem solving investigations as well as to hear of promising basic research. The development of research is a two-way street and we think these conferences also identify areas of inadequate knowledge, thereby stimulating needed research. We have represented here a number of types of specialists—animal ecologists, public health and transmissible disease experts, control methods specialists, public agency administration and enforcement staffs, agricultural extension people, manufacturing and sale industry representatives, commercial pest control operators, and others—and in addition to improving communications among these professional groups an equally important purpose of these conferences is to improve understanding between them and the general public. Within the term general public are many individuals and also organizations dedicated to appreciation and protection of certain animal forms or animal life in general. Proper concepts of vertebrate pest control do not conflict with such views. It is worth repeating for the record the definition of "vertebrate pest" which has been stated at our previous conferences. "A vertebrate pest is any native or introduced, wild or feral, non-human spe- cies of vertebrate animal that is currently troublesome locally or over a wide area to one or more persons either by being a general nuisance, a health hazard or by destroying food or natural resources. In other words, vertebrate pest status is not an inherent quality or fixed classification but is a circumstantial relationship to man's interests." I believe progress has been made in reducing the misunderstanding and emotion with which vertebrate pest control was formerly treated whenever a necessity for control was stated. If this is true, I likewise believe it is deserved, because control methods and programs have progressed. Control no longer refers only to population reductions by lethal means. We have learned something of alternate control approaches and the necessity for studying the total environment; where reduction of pest animal numbers is the required solution to a problem situation we have a wider choice of more selective, safe and efficient materials. Although increased attention has been given to control methods, research when we take a close look at the severity of animal damage to so many facets of our economy, particularly to agricultural production and public health, we realize it still is pitifully small and slow. The tremendous acceleration of the world's food and health requirements seems to demand expediting vertebrate pest control to effectively neutralize the enormous impact of animal damage to vital resources. The efforts we are making here at problem delineation, idea communication and exchange of methodology could well serve as both nucleus and rough model for a broader application elsewhere. I know we all hope this Third Conference will advance these general objectives, and I think there is no doubt of its value in increasing our own scope of information.