Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Hallinger, P. (2013). Reviewing reviews of research in educational leadership an empirical assessment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50, 539–576.

Abstract: Reviews of research play a critical but underappreciated role in knowledge production and accumulation. Yet, until relatively recently, limited attention has been given to the “methodology” of conducting reviews of research. This observation also applies in educational leadership and management where reviews of research have charted intellectual progress since the field’s inception in the 1950s and 1960s. This paper was framed as a “methodological review of reviews of research” in educational leadership and management. Method: The author analyzed 38 reviews of research in educational leadership published in nine international refereed journals over the past 52 years. The author applies a conceptual framework and analytical rubric for conducting systematic reviews of research in analyzing this sample of research reviews. Data analysis focuses on describing methodological characteristics, illuminating patterns of strength and weakness in review methods, and identifying a set of exemplary reviews. Findings: Despite publication of a number of “exemplary reviews,” there remains considerable room for improvement in the methodology of conducting systematic reviews of research in educational leadership and management. The study identified a tendency for research reviews in this field to omit key information concerning the rationale and nature of the studies included in the reviews, methods of data collection, extraction, evaluation and analysis, and how these choices impacted interpretation of the findings. Implications: This comprehensive set of 38 published review articles tracks the historical development of the field and, by itself, represents a rich harvest from the study. Within this historical corpus of reviews, the study identified a subset of “exemplary reviews” that can serve as useful models for future scholarship. Finally, by identifying patterns of methodological strength and weakness among the reviews as a group, the report offers empirically grounded recommendations for strengthening future reviews of research in educational leadership and management.

Journal Article 2: Martin, E. (2014). How to write a good article. Current Sociology, 62, 949–955.

Abstract: This article presents the main challenges of academic writing and publication in scientific journals. It reveals some of the most common mistakes in the process of manuscript submission and review, and offers some possible solutions.

Journal Article 3: Klinger, J. K. (2005). How to publish in scholarly journals. Educational Researcher, 34, 14–20.

Abstract: This article is based on an invited talk entitled “Getting Published While in Grad School,” which was presented for the Graduate Student Council of the American Educational Research Association at the association’s 2005 annual meeting. The authors discuss issues to consider when one is planning and writing a scholarly manuscript, and they offer several suggestions about substance, organization, and style. They also describe the journal submission and peer review process, including what to do if a journal editor’s decision is “revise and resubmit,” “accept pending revisions,” or “reject.”