A message to
aspiring authors from Andrew Malekoff[1],
Editor-in-Chief, Social Work with Groups,
a journal of community and clinical
practice
I have been reviewing manuscripts
for Social Work with Groups since I
became editor in1990. During that time I’ve noticed some trends in the types of
articles that were not accepted for publication, particularly those articles
that address direct practice. I want to describe those trends, that continue to
this day, and what my thinking is about them. Such discussion will help define
the kinds of articles about group work practice that I want to encourage in
this journal.
Broadly speaking, two kinds of
articles about direct practice are most prevalent among those not accepted for
publication in the journal. First, there are articles that describe the needs
and dynamics of a particular population group - those who have been abused or
persons with a particular illness, for example. While such delineations are
often informative, too frequently the reference to groups and group work
practice in such articles is minimal and seems to be appended reluctantly and
uneasily to qualify the article for consideration in this, a journal on work
with groups. The portions of such articles that refer to group work practice
are not an integral part of the authors’ presentations and seem artificial.
Second, there are articles that
describe a group and its process, be it a particular kind of group or a group
with a particular population, with which the author worked. While such
descriptions are often interesting, too frequently their purpose was unclear.
In these articles, the practice described is not examined conceptually and
therefore the applicability to other groups of the work depicted is never made
clear. Given the complexity of groups, of individuals, and of situations,
articles that are solely descriptive,
that do not look critically or analytically at work that is being presented,
are not helpful to their readers.
With respect to both kinds of paper,
population-oriented or purely descriptive, I have found practice illustrations
to be too general to capture the essence of the work described. Illustrations
that capture the true nature of group, bringing to life the interaction among
the members and between the members and the worker, are too often absent.
What I would like to see included in Social Work with Groups are articles
that bring together the doing and thinking of group work practice. In articles
that emphasize knowledge of the needs of a particular population, implications
for and illustrations of group work practice based on such knowledge need to be
integral. In articles that portray practice through presentation of descriptive
vignettes and examples, the rationale that underpins the practice, the thinking
behind it, and the implications for future practice with groups are crucial
elements.
I recognize that writing can be a
painstaking and tedious endeavor. To complete a work after several drafts, only
to have it rejected by journal editors, can be discouraging and demoralizing.
My feedback here is not meant to discourage, but just the reverse. My aim is to
encourage all with interest in work with groups to share their ideas and
experiences. I hope that increased understanding of the reasons that articles
are rejected for publication will result in an increased number of articles
that are accepted for inclusion in this journal.
[1] Andrew
Malekoff, Editor-in-Chief, Social Work
with Groups, c/o North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center, 480 Old
Westbury Road, Roslyn Heights, NY 11577. Email: Anjru@aol.com
No comments:
Post a Comment