Quality vs. Quantity

My original concern when considering why predatory publishers even have a chance to take hold of unsuspecting researches was that academia is asking too much of the young scientist. The readings and viewings for this post strengthened my belief that quantity ultimately diminishing quality in the field of education. I've been hearing about the dreaded tenure review since I was 18, and can't imagine having to produce such a large volume of quality work. I'm sure that some people can make everything happen at work, but end up sacrificing family life or other important values. If one can't find the time to balance work and personal life, I can easily see how an open-access journal is a tempting escape route. I can also imagine being swamped at work with exams to grade and a child to pick up from school, and receiving an email from a predatory publisher. You might not have the mental capacity in that moment to consider the solicitation, and might just be glad that a seemingly perfect opportunity fell from the internet sky. I don't blame the people who end up in these traps, but as a profession, we need to shed some light on the large issue of quality vs. quantity.

I believe that the majority of people who skew data didn't get into the sciences to mislead people. I also believe that the pressures placed on them by academic institutions or pharmaceutical companies might lead them to seek the easiest road to perceived success. I loved TED talks and was captivated instantly, but was shocked to realized that the tone of this video wasn't a positive one, and for good reason; I had no idea that major pharmaceutical companies were withholding or skewing data. I completely understand wanting to come out ahead - that's just human nature; but this a dark problem. It makes me sick to think about how else researchers might be cutting corners in order to satisfy the requirements by their employer. Of course, no one person is going to solve this problem. Perhaps we can, as a profession, find a way to emphasize truthful, quality research over quantity of publications.

As researchers, I think we can navigate through this minefield by sticking to what we know to be good and true. One downside of this approach is that new publications, which might be very good and serving a much-needed purpose, could be neglected until they gain some credibility. I know that Music Educators Journal is an outstanding publication for a few reasons; it is the journal of the National Association for Music Education - the leading advocacy association in our field,several of my professors preach its worth and are published in it, and through personal experience, I seem to find interesting scholarly articles published by impressive leaders in our field. Citing something from MEJ or submitting some of my own research to them would be a safe bet. If I come across an unfamiliar journal, however, I can always do my homework. I can research the purpose of the journal and the procedures for submitting articles. I can also contact the editorial board myself to verify that they hold this position. I can locate their credentials and run a Google search to ensure that there aren't any red flags. Of course, it's not always as easy as this; credentials can be falsely advertised and prominent researchers can be on an editorial board without knowing it. In order to safeguard ourselves, I think that diligently checking facts, discussing journals and their credentials with respected leaders in the field, and staying up on what is current in music education will help us avoid any predatory publishers.