Publications

Review Process for OSU Extension Educational Materials for Agriculture and Natural Resources Professionals

The following procedures for submitting materials authored by Department of Extension educators and specialists for statewide distribution follow the OSU Extension Policy & Procedures Handbook Administration Policies, Review Process for OSU Extension Educational Materials). Please refer to the handbook for the most complete and up-to-date information.

Before proceeding, contact your Assistant Director to indicate your intent to create or revise a publication.

Submission of New Original Work for Blind Peer Review

Submit the following to Sam (custer.2@osu.edu):

•  iThenticate Report
  Conduct an iThenticate analysis to ensure scholarly integrity. Click here for complete information and instructions for creating an account.
• Title Page:
  • Publication title
  • Authors’ full names, titles, institutions, phone numbers, and email addresses
    • Include complete mailing address for lead author
  • Abstract – 250 words or less
    • Description of content, including target audience and statement of need
• Word Document Draft (no author names or other identifying information)
  • Make sure citations are complete and follow most recent APA Publication Manual
• In the email to the AD:
  • briefly describe the educational need the materials intend to address
  • include the names, titles, institutions, and emails of potential reviewers, 3 internal (OSU Extension only) and 2 external
  • tags – important keywords that help online users find your publication
  • attach above documents

Timeline

• Within five working days of submission, individuals will be contacted to critically assess the submitted materials by adding track changes and comments to the document and offering ratings and comments on the Review of Extension Educational Materials form for content and readability. The reviewers have three weeks to return their comments and ratings.
• Reviewer ratings and comments will be sent to the AD before being forwarded to the authors.
• Authors will revise materials as necessary and return to the AD for final approval. Provide separate image files for photos, charts, graphs, and tables, as well as permissions received.
• The online Extension Publications Request form will be submitted by Sam. Fact sheets will normally be published in about three weeks. If you need it sooner, plan ahead!

Authorship Guidelines (from the OSU Office of Research Guidelines)

• Defining Rights and Responsibilities of Authorship
  • Generally speaking (and per ICMJE guidelines), in order to be an author on a scientific or scholarly work, an individual should have:
    • made a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception or design or the generation and analysis of the information;
    • participated in the drafting or revision of the manuscript regarding intellectual content;
    • participated in a final review and approval of the manuscript prior to publication;
    • agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work presented (we encourage using the Author Contributions Worksheet to identify specific contributions)
• Authorship Roles
  • Lead Author (also known as the First or Primary Author) – This is the person typically who has done the majority of the work and drafting of the manuscript. The lead/first author takes on additional responsibility for the accuracy and
    integrity of the manuscript.
  • Co-Authors – anyone contributing to the manuscript such that they meet the criteria established for authorship (see 1 above). Co-authors are responsible for reviewing and approving the final submission.
  • Senior Author – Typically this is the PI or senior most person involved in the work, often also serves as the corresponding author, and has additional responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript.
  • Corresponding Author – takes primary responsibility for the submission and communication with the publisher and responds to any questions about the work during and after publication.
  • Acknowledgments – people who participate but do not meet the criteria established for authorship are listed as acknowledgments.
• Unacceptable Authorship Practices
  • The following authorship practices are not in line with the criteria established for authorship and the
    values of Ohio State and should not be allowed:
    • Guest Authorship – the practice of assigning authorship to someone who has not participated in the work, simply
      to honor that person or to provide additional credibility to the submission based on the status or standing of the guest author.
    • Gift Authorship – the practice of assigning authorship to someone who has not participated in the work, to reward them
      or provide an unearned benefit.
    • Ghost Authorship – the practice of not providing named credit to individuals who have made substantial contributions
      to the work or in the writing of the manuscript. This often is seen with the use of professional writers who are not credited or acknowledged. Writing activities alone, such as writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading, without other contributions may not qualify for authorship, but should be acknowledged.
• Defining Order of Authorship
  • The order of authorship can vary widely between scientific disciplines, among publishers and specialty journals, and therefore, it is can be difficult to interpret the role of each author to a scientific or creative effort. In most disciplines,
    authorship is based on the extent of intellectual and editorial contribution, with the first author typically representing the individual(s) who carried out the majority of the research and writing, while the PI of the project is typically listed as the last, or the senior author. The senior author is, in many cases, also the ‘corresponding’ author.
  • However, in some disciplines or specialties, the order of authorship may be dictated strictly by alphabetical order of the authors or in some other manner. Therefore, explicitly stating the role and contribution of each author will enhance the
    transparency and credibility of the information as well as accurately assign credit for purposes of academic advancement and/or building a reputation. It is encouraged to seek advice on the order of authorship by reviewing the journal’s website.

Revision Process

• Revising Existing Original Work – Original authors should review materials they have authored for accuracy on an annual basis.
  • Minor changes (e.g., date change, insertion of additional O.R.C. chapter, etc.) will not need to go through the blind peer review process, but need to be submitted to the AD.
  • Major changes will go through the complete submission process for blind peer review as indicated above.
• Revising Existing Work of Others – Potential authors should determine whether the original author wishes to review/revise a publication.
  • If the original author does not wish to review/revise:
    • If minor changes are made, be sure to credit the original author(s). It will not be necessary to go through the blind peer review process, but will need to be submitted to the AD.
    • If major changes or a complete re-write is undertaken, follow the blind peer review process on page one, and give primary authorship credit to the current Extension professional(s) with secondary credit provided to original authors as necessary.
  • If the original author does wish to review/revise:
    • The interested Extension professional(s) can offer to work with the original author to revise the publication.
    • If minor changes are made, be sure to credit the original author(s) and follow the instructions for minor changes above.
    • If major changes or a complete re-write is undertaken, follow the blind peer review process on page one, and give primary authorship credit to the current Extension professional(s) with secondary credit provided to original authors as necessary.

 

Creating eBooks with Pressbooks