(Part of a behind-the-scenes series about editing the undergrad research journal. Read the first post here.)
As the first and second rounds of editing end, I find myself and my inbox flooded with other tasks and back-to-back emails from editors and professors. I still have yet to find a third peer reviewer for my main article, which has been a rather difficult task since I’ve contacted most people in the McGill Biochemistry and Human Genetics departments, and now a large amount of researchers at the University of Toronto. I was forewarned by other editors that most of them would either not respond or say no, but it’s only Reviewer #3 that is giving me a problem. Hopefully that gets sorted out quickly… hopefully is the key word.
I’ve also realized that even though we all think at the same level, so to speak, the majority of the editorial board is from different departments and thinks in different ways. Coming out of high school, I was never exposed to a wide range of thought processes; but now, the differences in thinking envelope me. Not only does it help the journal to have so many different thinkers, but it helps each individual on the board look at the articles in a different light. Many people forget that the key part of the university experience is not just to get an insanely high GPA, but to actually learn from your professors, P.I’s, and (especially) your peers. So, if any of you are hesitant in becoming a part of an extracurricular, a lab, or even a class… just try it out. Even if it doesn’t boost your GPA or help you achieve your immediate goals, you will find that meeting people from different educational backgrounds will assist you in the long run, and in a greater way than having a high GPA can…
…And now I find myself back in the time crunch. Reviewer #3, whoever you are, please get back to me. I wait for you with bated breath.