USEP WRITESHOP ON TRANSFORMING COMPLETED RESEARCH PROJECTS INTO PUBLISHABLE PAPERS (PHASE 2)

 

Key Outcomes

The session provided faculty researchers with a strategic framework for publishing in high-impact journals, emphasizing the "politics" of publication, the importance of international collaboration, and the rigor of the peer-review process. Key takeaways include the need to align titles and abstracts with journal scope, the value of a strong digital identity (ORCID, Google Scholar), and the necessity of treating peer-review feedback as a tool for scholarly growth rather than a personal setback.

Decisions & Agreements

• Decision: The Publication Unit will continue to support faculty through mentoring, training, and workshops to transform research into high-impact publishable papers. 1
• Decision: The Southeastern Philippines Journal of Research and Development (SPJRD) will maintain its focus on internationalization by recruiting diverse authors and reviewers to sustain its Scopus indexing and improve its quartile ranking. 23
• Agreement: Faculty should prioritize publishing in reputable, indexed journals (Scopus, Web of Science) over predatory journals to contribute to the university's global ranking and academic reputation. 45

Publication Strategy & Best Practices

• Journal Selection:
  • Align the paper's title and scope with the journal's aims and audience; avoid overly localized titles (e.g., specific barangay names) without broader national or international implications. 67
  • Study the structure and style of already published articles in the target journal to understand the editors' and reviewers' expectations. 89
• Abstract Construction:
  • Use a structured approach (e.g., Swales' moves: introduction/background, purpose, method, results, and conclusion/implication) to provide a clear picture of the study. 101112
  • Ensure cultural terms used in the title are clearly explained and integrated into the abstract and discourse. 1314
• Introduction & Methodology:
  • Establish a research territory by reviewing existing literature and identifying a clear gap that the study addresses. 1516
  • Provide detailed, transparent methodology, including fieldwork duration, instrument validation, and research ethics clearance, especially in the age of AI. 1718
• Results, Discussion, & Conclusion:
  • Organize results and discussion around the research questions stated in the introduction. 19
  • Use a structured conclusion that summarizes the study, indicates limitations, and explicitly states the implications for the field or region (e.g., Mindanao and ASEAN). 20
• References:
  • Ensure references are up-to-date and follow the required style (e.g., APA); outdated or poorly formatted references can lead to desk rejection. 21

Peer Review Process

• Nature of Peer Review:
  • Peer review is a rigorous, often lengthy process that can take months or years and may involve multiple rounds of revision. 222324
  • It is designed to ensure high-quality research standards, credibility, and integrity. 25
• Common Review Models:
  • Single-anonymized: Reviewer remains anonymous to authors. 26
  • Double-anonymized: Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. 26
  • Triple-anonymized: Authors, reviewers, and editors are anonymous to each other. 27
  • Open peer review: Identities of authors and reviewers are disclosed. 28
  • Transparent peer review: Reviews are published alongside the article. 29
• Handling Rejection:
  • Rejection is common and should be viewed as an opportunity for improvement rather than a personal failure. 30
  • Use reviewer feedback to refine the paper and consider submitting to a different journal that better fits the scope. 31

AI in Publishing

• Acceptable Use (Green Flags):
  • Using AI tools to improve clarity, tone, structure, and organization of writing, provided the output remains fully reviewer-controlled. 32
• Unacceptable Use (Red Flags):
  • Using AI to replace the reviewer or researcher, compromising confidentiality, or uploading manuscripts to unsecured tools. 33
• Institutional Context:
  • The university is working on a memo adhering to CHED guidelines on the use of AI in research and publishing. 34

Metrics & Achievements

• SPJRD Indexing:
  • Indexed in the Andrew Gonzalez Philippine Citation Index in January 2023. 35
  • Indexed in Scopus in September 2023. 235
  • Currently applying for indexing in the ASEAN Citation Index (ACI) and Web of Science. 35
• University Publication Performance:
  • 92 Scopus publications achieved so far this year, exceeding the previous year's total. 36
  • Total publications reached 353 as of the reporting date. 36
• SPJRD Ranking:
  • Achieved a Quartile 2 (Q2) ranking in 2025. 3738
  • CiteScore is 1.1. 39

Action Items

• Faculty Researchers:
  • Complete the pre-test before starting the workshop. 40
  • Work on manuscript drafts during the workshop session. 41
  • Upload writeshop outputs in the evaluation form to receive a certificate of participation. 41
  • Build a digital identity through ORCID, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar profiles. 42
  • Seek mentorship from seasoned researchers within the institution. 43
• Publication Unit / Editors:
  • Continue applications for ACI and Web of Science indexing. 35
  • Provide guidance and tips on publishing in Scopus-indexed journals during the afternoon session. 44
  • Revisit university policies on publication incentives to encourage more faculty publishing. 45