Multi-Faceted Learning Alternatives
Rethinking print journals.
NOTE: This following is my response to an editorial suggestion of a respected genealogist’s article. The editors called for adding information about the bounty land script process concerning a person the author had excluded from the focus of his article. The back and forth editorial process was for the peer reviewed NGSQ (National Genealogical Society Quarterly) but this could apply to the use of any hard-copy print media. The following are strictly my own opinions.
Explaining every tidbit of knowledge gleaned during the research process would take a book.
You are submitting an article.
But as you say, if the editors want to give you more space, who am I to judge?
On the other hand, including details about an excluded research subject could reflect poorly on an author, particularly if the result is loss of focus.
Your focus appears different from the editor in question. You are sharing unique identifying info about an individual, while your editor apparently wants to teach readers about bounty land warrants for military service, using the example of an unrelated individual.
That teaching moment would make a great sidebar in a book or an online article where space is not at a premium.
————
Perhaps publishers of peer reviewed articles might rethink paper copies in the 21st century. Why not include a QR code to a subscriber-only website for more info?
We no longer make effective us of our learning opportunities by reading print media.
Crafting a multi-faceted approach to your article could maintain your focus and accommodate related teaching moments.
This would require coordination between the author, editors, and the NGS education chair.
IMAGE: AdobeStock_335828989 by Nikcoa licensed to Pat Richley 1/16/2025.
