







































Emerging Perspectives 
ep.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca 
 

 

Reflections on Creating a Student-Run Journal: A Duo-ethnography 

Maisha M. Syeda, Jon Woodend, Gina Ko, Teresa Fowler, Konstantinos Chondros,  

Brianna Hilman, & Britney M. Paris 

Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary 

 

Literature regarding graduate student training suggests that graduate students 

struggle to become involved in academic publishing. Once involved in the publication 

process, however, graduate students are able to transform their learning, as well as 

develop knowledge and skills for their future careers. To further foster student 

involvement in the publication process in the Werklund School of Education (WSE) at 

the University of Calgary, seven graduate students from educational research and 

psychology decided to launch a student-run, peer-reviewed research journal called 

Emerging Perspectives: Interdisciplinary Graduate Research in Education and 

Psychology (EPIGREP). This article focuses on the editorial team members’ shared 

reflections and experiences as we used Norris and Sawyer’s (2012) duo-ethnographic 

approach to answer questions regarding the identified gaps that EPIGREP would fill 

in terms of graduate student training, the challenges and barriers faced during the 

inaugural year, and the ways in which participation in the journal could empower 

journal users to engage in the publication process. Finally, we note implications and 

future directions regarding establishing EPIGREP as a graduate student initiative to 

foster research participation. 

 

Keywords: graduate research training; academic publishing; duo-ethnography 

 
Syeda, M. M., Woodend, J., Ko. G., Fowler. T., Chondros. K., Hilman, B., & Paris, B. M. 

(2017) Reflections on creating a student-run journal: A duo-ethnography. Emerging 

Perspectives, 1(1), iii-xxi 

Introduction 

Graduate education is often considered to be preparation, job training, or socialization for 

future careers within academia (Austin, 2002; Ethington & Pissani, 1993; Gardner & Barnes, 

2007). However, for some students, graduate programs lack sufficient training in academic literacy 

and preparation opportunities for publication, both as an author and as a participant in the 

publication process. Garbati and Samuels (2013) found that only 8.60% of all authors in 

educational research were graduate students. Garbati and Samuels noted that students were not 

publishing with other students and only four papers were sole-authored by students. However, 

publication opportunities and writing collaboration with peers may not only enhance but also 

provide opportunities for students to develop as academics and scholars (Garbati & Samuels, 

2013). Such work also provides graduate students with the opportunity “to become involved in the 

work and life of the faculty” (Austin & McDaniels, 2006, p. 414). By engaging in such a hands-on 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        iv 

experience, graduate students become connected to not just the work itself but also the community, 

which benefits from the work (Johnson, 2013). This experience also provides students with “unique 

gains not available in their training programs” (Doran, Somerville, Harlem-Siegel, & Steele, 2014, 

p. 122). 

While Garbati and Samuels (2013) presented research on student authors, little is known 

about students as reviewers or editors during their academic careers. If graduate students are to 

have opportunities to become sole-authors and develop academic literacy, they need to better 

understand the publishing process through experiences as reviewers, writers, and even editors of a 

journal. Ni Uigin, Higgins and McHale (2015) stated that being involved in the publication process 

has many benefits for students, as it helps them develop components of academic literacy such as 

problem solving and critical thinking. In the development of the journal and in their roles as editors, 

“students were encouraged to think critically and creatively beyond the parameters of the classroom 

environment and to actively engage with the theoretical knowledge that they had mastered” (p. 63). 

It is in this arena, beyond the classroom environment, where graduate students find their voice as 

academics (Ni Uigin et al., 2015). Academic literacy can also be referred to as academic capital, a 

construct extended from Bourdieu’s (1977) forms of capital that are fostered through the social 

structures graduate students interact with. These forms of capital are socialized forms of language, 

literacy, and access to higher forms of knowledge that graduate students are surrounded with during 

their academic tenure. However, if these forms of capital only reside within the walls of a classroom 

or on a course syllabus, increasing academic literacy through an acquisition of capital does not 

extend or grow the socialization of graduate students to become academics. Through the 

undertaking of a student-initiated project, graduate students have the potential to not only increase 

their academic capital but also their social capital through “connect[ing] in some fundamental way 

with various aspects of the social life of the institution” (Maldonado, Rhoads, & Buenavista, 2005, 

p. 610). The graduate student experience often resides within four walls; therefore, if graduate 

students seek to further their careers and better understand the publication process, a start-up 

journal offers a means to develop forms of capital and academic literacy. 

Garbati and Samuels (2013) called for graduate programs to revisit their role in facilitating 

student authorship. Specifically, they suggested that graduate programs either formally modify 

their degree requirements to allow first-time authors to get their work published or support their 

involvement in the peer-review practice as reviewers or editors. Austin and McDaniels (2006) 

echoed this suggestion, noting that “the graduate school experience must include opportunities...to 

master the skills and abilities associated with each aspect of faculty work” (p. 449). While there is 

currently movement in this direction in the Werklund School of Education (WSE) at the University 

of Calgary through the development of guidelines for graduate students to complete manuscript-

based thesis, graduate students also need to be leaders and be involved in the creation of additional 

research training opportunities. In particular, student initiatives have the ability to make valuable 

changes within the academy. “Top-down approaches alone will not bring about the needed change, 

as they fail to appreciate the role that graduate students and postdocs - who are grossly 

underrepresented in this discourse - play in eliciting change” (Schillebeeckx, Maricque, & Lewis, 

2013, p. 938). Inspired to elicit this change, graduate students in education and psychology at WSE 

created Emerging Perspectives: Interdisciplinary Graduate Research in Education and Psychology 

(EPIGREP), a student-led journal in which graduate students gain experience at all levels of the 

publication process, thereby increasing their academic literacy and capital. 

The founding editors of EPIGREP discovered unintended outcomes through the process of 

creating a student-led journal, which prompted an inquiry into the process. Given the paucity of 

research in the area of student publishing and student-led journal start-ups in graduate school, we 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        v 

thought to offer our experiences of creating a journal through duo-ethnography, as each founding 

member has developed their own perspectives from the start-up. What we hope to share through 

this article is not only how the process unfolded for us as beginning editors but how each of us has 

extended our learning beyond the confines of classroom walls and course syllabi and transformed 

our graduate learning experience. We also discuss the theoretical concepts that framed the study, 

including transformative leadership and peer-supported learning, and then outline the research 

method of duoethnography. After a discussion on the research design and analysis, we share our 

findings and implications for future directions. 

Theoretical Underpinnings 

Transformative Learning 
In the last few decades, transformational learning has become one of several influential adult 

learning theories (Meriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2012).  For instance, transformative 

learning theory underscored the lived experience of women returning to school (Mezirow, 1978), 

cultural spiritual transformation (Tisdell, 2003), race-centric and social change transformation 

(Williams, 2006), and as a course of restorying our lives (Randall, 1996). Clark (1993) stated that 

transformational learning: 

shapes people; they are different afterward, in ways both they and others can recognize. The 

process can be gradual or sudden, and it can occur in a structured education environment or 

in the classroom of ordinary life. Transformational learning is, in short, a normal part of our 

lives and intimately connected to the developmental process. (p. 47) 

Hence, a transformation is one that can be life-altering; associated with growth and progress. In 

creating this article, we focused specifically on Mezirow’s (1991) theory of transformative learning 

regarding our experiences of coming together to create and operate a student-run journal. Mezirow 

described various forms of learning through his own experience: learning how to do something; 

learning about how something works; learning about the expectations of others; and learning to 

form a progressing concept of self as a person with particular values (Mezirow, 1978).  He noted 

that the most fundamental learning occurs when we are “caught in our history and reliving it” (p. 

101).  He was referring to the need to be reflexive of assumptions that have predisposed the way 

we see ourselves, our relationships with others, and the way we live our lives. 

Furthermore, Mezirow (1991) discussed how our expectations or habits can be challenged 

through reflection and critique and may result in the transformation of “meaning perspective” and 

“experience” of the interpretation (p. 6). Mezirow pointed to how transformative learning is at the 

forefront when assumptions are discovered to be inauthentic, distorting, and therefore, invalid.  

Hence, a transformation is apparent when new or transformed meaning schemas emerge, or when 

reflections centered on these assumptions transform meaning perspectives (Mezirow, 1991). He 

argued: 

Adult development is seen as an adult’s progressively enhanced capacity to validate prior 

learning through reflective discourse and to act upon the resulting insights. Anything that 

moves the individual toward a more inclusive, differentiated, permeable (open to other points 

of view), and integrating meaning perspective, the validity of which has been established 

through rational discourse, aids in adult development. (p. 7) 

Therefore, to be transformed is a personal and progressive process. This process involves meaning 

perspectives, or how we understand experience; intentional learning, which is a process of problem 

solving; making meaning through reflection; distorted assumptions or uncovering errors in 

learning; perspective transformation, which considers how learning leads to change; and fostering 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        vi 

transformative adult learning (Mezirow, 1991). 

Peer-Supported Learning 

Graduate programs in education and other faculties have been working to transform the 

environment for graduate students and increase completion rates through peer mentoring and peer-

supported learning programs (Noonan, Ballinger, & Black, 2007). Such programs and shifts in 

graduate student experiences have moved graduate student learning and engagement beyond the 

supervisor-supervisee relationship and past coursework to include “multiple and overlapping 

notions of communities” (Boud & Lee, 2005, p. 503) where graduate students are afforded 

opportunities to extend their relationships beyond the confines of their supervisor’s office and the 

classroom setting. This transformation of the graduate student experience has not only generated a 

growth in peer-to-peer engagement (Boud & Lee, 2005) but has also “increase[d] the time and 

physical and psychological energy that students devote to the academic experience” (Colvin & 

Ashman, 2010, p.122). Peer mentoring and peer-supported learning resides at the centre of the 

experience of creating our journal for both ourselves, as members of the editorial board, and our 

fellow graduate students with the unintentional consequence of transforming our graduate school 

experience. 

The hierarchical relationships in graduate school, how we find our way within graduate 

studies, and how we understand the nuances and clandestine practices are either navigated blindly 

or with the support of our supervisors. As graduate students, however, we also need to learn how 

to find our way outside of this privileged relationship, extending ourselves to better understand the 

“ill-defined problems of the field” (Noonan, Ballinger, & Black, 2007, p. 252). These hidden 

experiences that are left for discovery become sites of deep, impactful learning that grow 

organically around a common seed, and the learning that occurs at these sites can rival the 

experiences gained within coursework (Colvin & Ashman, 2010). Agency and autonomy become 

distributed, not vertically, such as our relationships with instructors and supervisors, but 

horizontally as we work through the troubles and obstacles that are associated with creating a 

graduate student-run journal (Boud & Lee, 2007). 

The editorial board is moving through a process of learning with each other while also 

becoming mentors for our peers through the process of publishing and reviewing. Each of us as 

editors have had experiences of being published and/or rejected through publishing and being 

reviewers; therefore, we seek to work with our peers using concepts that have been identified as 

successful components of a peer mentoring relationship (Noonan, Ballinger, & Black, 2007). In 

the publishing and reviewing process, our editorial team has built relationships with our fellow 

graduate students through encouraging and motivating peers within the publication process. 

Through the publication process, we are not only providing opportunities for emerging research to 

become published but also working with fellow graduate students new to both the steps required 

for a successful publication and the completion of a good review, resulting in an encouraging means 

for professional exposure to academic publishing. 

This experience has benefited not only fellow graduate students through mentorship 

opportunities and exposure to academic publishing, but also ourselves as graduate student editors. 

That is, we have learned how to better support our peers, develop a better understanding of the 

publishing process, and make connections in academia and publishing spheres (Colvin & Ashman, 

2010). As we each work to not only publish an academic journal, but also to enhance the graduate 

student experience, we have embodied a deep sense of agency that moves far beyond a course 

syllabus. 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        vii 

 

Research Method 

As authors and research participants, we were interested in understanding the transformative 

learning we experienced during the past year as the founding EPIGREP editorial team. More than 

this individual reflection, however, we sought to highlight our converging and diverging 

perspectives of this shared experience. Through this polyvocal account, we hoped to challenge our 

assumptions and, importantly, encourage continued growth and learning as we embark on the next 

step in the journey to develop EPIGREP. These goals, along with our research question and 

theoretical underpinnings, fit with the duo-ethnographic approach, which “is a collaborative 

research methodology in which two or more researchers of difference juxtapose their life histories 

to provide multiple understandings” (Norris & Sawyer, 2012, p. 9). 

Norris and Sawyer (2004) established duo-ethnography as a way to move past the hegemony 

of auto-ethnography, which prioritizes one voice above others. Instead, a duo-ethnographic 

approach invites multiple voices in order to challenge status quo assumptions, ideologies, and 

epistemologies (Norris, 2008). Based on a history of social justice, duo-ethnography is used to 

address power and privilege within society, creating space for voices that are typically marginalized 

(Norris & Sawyer, 2012). In the case of our study, we presented our voices as student researchers 

regarding our experience of establishing a journal for and by students. As student voices are 

underrepresented in the peer-reviewed process (Garbati & Samuels, 2013), a duo-ethnographic 

approach provided an opportunity to shed light on this perspective. 

In establishing duo-ethnography, Sawyer and Norris (2012b) identified 14 tenets. First, 

people make meaning of their experiences through personal analysis, creating an informal life 

curriculum. Second, researchers as participants position themselves as part of the text they are 

creating, not outside of it. Third, researchers as participants are not the focus of the inquiry but are 

the context in which the exploration occurs. Fourth, researchers as participants re-conceptualize 

important experiences or dominant stories of their lives. Fifth, researchers as participants focus on 

questioning experiences, rather than aligning themselves with prescribed roles such as the hero or 

victim. Sixth, identity is not rigid and is always open to change and questioning. Seventh, the 

meanings created through this exploration are fluid and are not meant to represent objective truths. 

Eighth, the goals of the inquiry are not prescribed beforehand and applied to the data in order to 

shape it. Ninth, researchers as participants are individually charged with the responsibility of 

promoting diverging rather than converging reflections in the dialogue. Tenth, power and privilege 

are explicitly discussed in the dialogue. Eleventh, the sociopolitical location of participants is a 

relevant context for the dialogue. Twelfth, the state of the literature relevant to the dialogue is a 

relevant context for analysis. Thirteenth, participants work together in a shared responsibility to 

explore new perspectives rather than converging around one perspective. Finally, readers of a duo-

ethnography become themselves participants in the dialogue, offering continued analysis and 

changing of perspectives. 

Research Design and Analysis 

The participants in this inquiry were a group of seven graduate students from different 

educational research and psychology specializations who formed the founding EPIGREP editorial 

team. As the context of participants is important in a duo-ethnographic approach, we will briefly 

outline our specializations. At the time of inquiry, Maisha was a doctoral candidate in School and 

Applied Child Psychology with research interests in the area of childhood anxiety disorders, 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        viii 

specifically, understanding interactions of risk factors and examining mindfulness-based cognitive-

behavioral interventions for anxiety in diverse child and youth populations. Jon was a doctoral 

candidate in Counselling Psychology with research interests in the international career transition 

of skilled immigrant workers and international students to Canada. Brit was a master’s student in 

Language and Literacy investigating the effect of learner language proficiency on responses to 

written corrective feedback. Gina was a doctoral student in Educational Leadership with research 

interests pertaining to the experience of immigrant and refugee youth leading for social justice and 

advocacy. Konstantinos was a doctoral student in Counselling Psychology with research interests 

in social justice advocacy for queer clients in counselling. Brianna was a doctoral candidate in 

Language and Literacy with research interests in sociolinguistics, settlement, and internationally-

educated tradespeople in Alberta. Teresa was a doctoral candidate in Curriculum and Learning with 

research interests in understanding student expressions and feelings of disengagement with the 

curriculum in schools using photovoice as a methodology. 

For data collection, we were guided by Sawyer and Norris (2012a, c, d). Specifically, the 

editorial team gathered together to engage in a recorded, two-hour dialogue regarding the research 

question “What gaps did we hope the Journal would fill in graduate student training?” First, we 

took turns sharing an opening reflection about the roles and niche we anticipate the journal to fill 

in training graduate students to be better scholars. From there, the dialogue evolved into new 

reflections about our experiences, which changed as we listened to each other’s accounts. To help 

guide the conversation and before engaging in the duo-ethnography, we developed some questions, 

such as “What were some of the barriers and challenges we faced during our inaugural year?” and 

“How do we wish to empower journal users and ourselves through the publication process?” We 

then transcribed the recording, reviewed the transcript, and added or refined our respective 

reflections to smooth out the dialogue for reader comprehension. 

For data analysis, we followed the example of Nabavi and Lund (2012). Given the breadth 

and depth of data, we negotiated which critical learnings from the conversation to include in this 

article. Our intention was not to stymie our learning by promoting one story over another, but rather 

to strike a balance between breadth and depth by providing space for a thorough exploration over 

a superficial one. Our hope is that we will continue this process in future articles and eventually be 

able to share the full body of learning that emerged from this duo-ethnography. 

Research Findings and Discussion 

In presenting the findings, Norris (2008) noted that there is no one ‘right’ way to engage in 

duo-ethnography, however, one approach is to synthesize data collection, i.e., stories, and analysis, 

identifying key shifts in learning for an integrated discussion of findings. Consequently, we 

organized our findings to showcase the key stories from the dialogue based on the three guiding 

questions. After presenting the key stories for each research question, we provide a short discussion 

before moving on to the next research question. Finally, we offer a synthesis discussion for all 

stories in order to illuminate future research steps. 

Question 1: What Gaps Did We Hope the Journal Would Fill in Graduate Student Training? 

In addressing this first research question, there were two main themes within the dialogue. 

First, we discussed the circumstances that lead to each of us pursuing involvement with a student-

run journal. Second, we noted what our original goals were, either individually or as decided upon 

by the group, for the journal, and the objectives of the journal to supplement graduate students’ 

training. The stories below showcase these themes. 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        ix 

Precipitating Circumstances for Pursuing a Student-Run Journal 

Maisha: If I think back to the beginning of the journal, it started when Graduate Programs in 

Education Students’ Association (GPESA) applied for a Graduate Students’ Association (GSA) 

quality grant. GPESA was established about two-three years prior to my start in the association. 

Therefore, GPESA was also going through several transitions in establishing itself as a student-

body organization within the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary. Back in 

2013, we were still a very young organization and we wanted to be secure financially to be able to 

provide more effective and meaningful services to our students and the greater Werklund 

community. We put together a grant to fund resources that we would need to establish GPESA. 

The executives of GPESA also wanted to provide a platform for Werklund students to engage in 

research and scholarship through a journal, operated by the organization.  

Fortunately, we were successful in winning the grant, but there was not much movement made to 

establish the journal in the first year. In 2014, when I was elected President of GPESA, I felt that I 

had some personal responsibility to start some movement and work towards establishing the journal 

to utilize the grant money. That was my original objective of the journal, to get it off the ground. 

Brit: I was also a member of GPESA as a Promotions and Media Relations Officer. I was at our 

first transition meeting, and I started chatting with other GPESA journal committee members. At 

that time, I had also recently taken a position as a research assistant with the Taylor Institute 

developing online conference proceedings, so I then shared with these committee members that I 

had experience with an online journal, and they said that it was fantastic, so I pushed my way onto 

the committee. It was really serendipitous, actually. I was like yeah, I could help with online journal 

systems, I know who to talk to, I am already in contact with somebody. I had just gone to a 

conference in open access publishing where I had seen a presentation on someone creating a student 

journal. My aim at the time was to be the glue that kept the journal together, to use my knowledge 

about the journal system to keep the journal operating and to get that grant money used. 

Brianna: In my first year as a doctoral student, in my own Educational Specialisation Area 

(EDSA), Language and Literacy, we had discussions about starting our own journal. While initially 

many of the EDSA students were interested in being part of the journal initiative, we slowly lost 

participants because students were graduating, for example, and after a while, I was the only one 

left. When I heard through GPESA, I was also a member at that time, that they had the money and 

there were other people who were interested to starting a journal, I was like great! I figured I could 

try to be part of this journal instead and still achieve my goal of helping to create a journal. 

Teresa: I was in my second year of my doctoral program and had not yet had that grad school 

experience I was looking for. My thoughts were always that grad school ought to be this place 

where students gather and talk, tackling issues that were important to them but also work 

collaboratively to fill voids that we felt were there in our programs, such as study groups and just 

someone to reflect ideas off. I had not yet experienced this, so when I saw there was a vacancy in 

the GPESA for a Curriculum and Learning representative, I put in my name and found a wonderful 

group of people that began to fill out my experience in the program. At one meeting, Maisha asked 

if anyone would be interested in joining the editorial board. So, I signed up and not only do I love 

being a part of such a cool thing as starting a journal but this experience really matched those grad 

school experiences I was looking to have. 

Konstantinos: As for me, Maisha approached me, and she said “well, there's this new position, 

this is what has been happening with this journal, if you're interested, let's have a conversation.” I 

thought about it, and I had worked on publications before, with my supervisor, and I had already 

reviewed a few manuscripts for other journals. I started thinking, okay, if this is the trajectory that 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        x 

I'm going to take in the future, if this is my future career path, being involved in academia in various 

capacities, one of which can be reviewing, or editing or just being a researcher, wanting to publish 

my own work, I think this journal is a great opportunity for me to come in and learn from the inside-

out, or what's going on behind the scenes of publishing. 

Jon: Kind of similar to Konstantinos, Maisha approached me to talk about seeing if I was 

interested, and at that time, I had just finished going through a year of working on a few different 

articles for publication, receiving mentorship from a senior faculty member, and so, I was really 

going through this process, seeing what it was like to become a first-time author. I also had an 

opportunity to be a reviewer for a book that one of those articles was going into. As well, I was 

beginning to think of, okay, is there a future career path for me as an academic, because I came 

into graduate school thinking just about the practical aspect. I wanted to go into the program to 

become a clinician. I was feeling torn between two worlds, so then when Maisha brought this up, 

it seemed like an opportunity to explore further, one way or the other, but something that I was 

struggling with at the time was that, being an educator in my past, and being someone who wants 

to be more in practice, pure academia felt more theoretical, less tangible. Being an editor, having 

an opportunity to be an editor felt like a way to bridge past experiences by capitalising on the 

experience I had just gained, becoming an author, and offering mentorship in my role as an editor 

to new authors, and being hands-on with that whole process. 

Gina: I'm the new kid on the block! I just joined the editorial board recently and came on while 

you were all in the middle of establishing the journal. I guess I'll go back to the beginning. I also 

joined GPESA, a few years after others on the team, and at one meeting Brit and I ended up 

chatting, and Brit asked would you be interested in being a reviewer. I said okay, what does that 

entail? She said you'll get these articles sent to you in your area of focus, and then you review it. 

You know what? I didn't know the difference between a reviewer and an editor at that time ha! So, 

I thought well this is a good opportunity and also one of the faculty members approached me last 

year or the year before. She knew that I do quite well with APA editing so she asked me to edit her 

book and I did that for her with her, it was so much fun, like I really enjoyed that part of it so I 

thought well I have some skills, I have lots to learn, I should put those skills to use and gain some 

additional training by joining the journal. 

Figuring out our objectives and clarifying goals for the journal 

Brit: Along the lines of expectations for the journal, we didn't know what to expect, we didn't 

know how many hours a week it was going to be for editors or reviewers. We didn't know how 

many submissions we might get, we didn't know how much work it would be per editor, so I then 

really saw it as my role, as the journal manager, to figure that all out and so I got the website up 

and got us trained on that so it became tangible and manageable. I felt like we couldn’t have specific 

goals or objectives until we had these details determined. 

Maisha: Yeah and I think we also had some key meetings, I remember we had a weekend meeting 

where we met at like 9 o'clock and we stayed on campus until like 4 o'clock to figure out the website 

details and finalize the scope and focus, because we needed a resource for ourselves and to show 

potential authors that this is what the journal does, this is how publication would work. It was at 

this point that we needed those very focused, intentional, goal-oriented meetings with an end 

product. That was key for creating momentum and beginning to define the goals and objectives of 

the journal and how it would support students. 

Konstantinos: Even though we had the website and some specific objectives, I think the way we 

individually understand those objectives may differ. For me, I see the journal as an opportunity for 

students to have a voice in terms of getting their research published and helping them with their 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xi 

future career if they're interested in going down that road. I keep thinking about the ethics of why 

we're doing what we're doing. Is it just to get that publication out there and for someone to have it 

on their CV or, you know, is this something that matters, that's going to be out there that people 

have access to and, most importantly, have free access to. How do we support our audience to 

engage in this process and help them grow in terms of their skills through the feedback we provided, 

the feedback that the reviewers provide, and who we appoint. 

Maisha: I came from a very research intensive undergraduate institute and we had a lot of focus 

on research-related activities, you were going to conferences from undergraduate, you were part of 

publications, so when I came to Werklund specifically, it was hard for me to go through a transition 

where I met a lot of graduate students for whom the focus was not in academia. Even in educational 

research, the students are like “Yeah, I want to become a consultant” or, you know…I mean “I 

want to be a practitioner.” Especially in the psychology field, it was hard for me because my focus 

has always been in academia and think of practice on the side. So I sort of thought about “why are 

there fewer people at Werklund interested in becoming a researcher?” And then I thought about, 

from a structural point of view, do we have enough opportunities for students to consider academia 

as an option? Do we provide the resources and the training where students from a master’s level 

will think that “I’m comfortable coming into academia”? Or “I have enough publications that I 

would be competitive enough to apply for a job.” And I felt that was missing, so I really started 

thinking about having a journal that comes out of Werklund, that will contribute to some extent to 

fostering a culture of academia. Where it’s maybe a beginning step for students becoming more 

comfortable with publishing, where students get more opportunity and mentorship with publishing. 

Brianna: For me, it was important as an objective to have the mentorship piece, and the learning 

piece. At various times, we’ve kind of pulled back from offers from faculty to help with the journal 

because we didn’t want it to be taken over or run by them. We really wanted it to be a student-led 

journal, and we really wanted to set up the process where you do the module online so you get 

some idea of what is expected of you and what you need to do. For example, if we get papers that 

seem like they are not ready yet, to be able to work with the authors and say, “here’s what you can 

do, what else can we do to help you.” It’s not enough just to know that the manuscript is not good 

enough, we need an opportunity to learn, to be taught. 

Teresa: To build onto Brianna’s thoughts, being the editor in charge of reviewing book reviews 

has been eye opening in that almost half of the ones submitted struggled with reviewing a book 

and then expressing their understandings on paper. Some of the writers had experience with 

publishing and this showed, but the majority had not, so I did not really recognize how much 

mentorship was going to be involved with this small aspect of the journal. Clearly, mentorship and 

learning opportunities are a critical objective for the journal. 

Jon: I think that’s what stood out to me, too, in terms of objectives. One of the objectives of the 

journal was that we wanted it to not just be a journal; we wanted it to be a journal that filled a niche, 

a journal that targeted a gap that students needed to bridge into ideas. I think sometimes, if we’re 

honest about it, there is a lot of stigma against education and psychology, that they’re not 

competitive in terms of research and things like that, compared to the hard sciences like physics 

and chemistry, for example. I think a journal with a base in education, in WSE, was an opportunity 

to build not only the confidence of ourselves, but other students to make that bridge into 

publication. 

Gina: I think the energy that we all have, when we put all our objectives together is going to keep 

the journal moving forward, despite feeling like an imposter sometimes. “What can I offer? What 

do I have to offer? What do I know about publishing, as an editor?” It’s a learning journey, it’s a 

process that, I think, that’s key for me because, as a graduate student, I don’t think I’ll ever stop 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xii 

learning, whether I’m done my PhD or, you know, whether I’m in academia or a practitioner or 

both, I’m never going to stop, so discovering these changing objectives as we learn and grow is a 

part of that journey. 

Discussion. As we started the dialogue, one of the key themes that we all touched on was our 

origin stories about the needs, wants, and precipitating circumstances that brought us to the journal. 

Although we were all in similar degree levels at the same post-secondary institution, we had unique 

skills and gaps in our training that made the journal a fit for us. It was this balance between having 

skills already, such as Brit’s knowledge about the journal platform or Gina's APA skill, and where 

we wanted to expand our learning, including Teresa’s, Konstantinos’s and Jon's desires to explore 

future career options in academia, that created the precipitating circumstances leading each of us 

to the journal. Joining the journal was based on personal and professional motivations from all in 

the editorial board and as Maisha noted, we felt a sense of responsibility to take on the challenge 

of creating and running a student journal. 

Given the differing personal and professional reasons that brought each of us to the journal, 

when we started talking about the specific expectations or objectives that we had, it seemed logical 

that we would also have our own ideas about the purpose of the journal. Moreover, these objectives 

seemed to evolve or solidify as we went through the process of creating and operating the journal. 

For example, Maisha knew she wanted to create a culture of research, while Brianna and Teresa 

wanted to demystify the publication process. However, even with these differing objectives, we 

seemed to coalesce around the shared utility of mentorship to achieve these goals. For us, 

mentorship was a platform that allowed beginning authors and users of the journal to figure out 

their objectives, for example, get a publication, while also providing us the opportunity to clarify 

the journal’s goals.  

Question 2: What Were Some of the Barriers and Challenges We Faced in our Inaugural Year? 

As our conversation evolved to talking about the barriers and challenges we experienced in 

our inaugural year, two primary themes emerged in our discussion. First, we identified that one of 

our unexpected challenges was to involve graduate students with the journal. In our perception, we 

felt that students were not as enthusiastic as we anticipated them to be for the journal or to be part 

of the journal as authors. Second, in our discussion, we also noted the challenges we all experienced 

in creating a balance in our work and academic schedules while simultaneously finding adequate 

time and opportunities to fulfill our responsibilities as editors effectively. The conversations below 

reflect these themes. 

Lack of student engagement and enthusiasm for the journal 

Maisha: I think our initial initiatives were predominantly faculty-focused when we were trying to 

establish the journal. We had great, insightful conversations and discussion with various faculty 

members who gave us invaluable guidance in establishing a student-run journal. However, I don’t 

think we have taken enough opportunities to foster engagement and enthusiasm among our peers, 

the graduate students. I don’t believe our peers are enthusiastic yet about our journal, and our 

journal is essentially established for graduate students. I think we are still missing this, students are 

not relating to the journal, where they feel that this establishment will play some role in enhancing 

their graduate training. We need to spark that enthusiasm and engagement. We need to reach out 

to students. During the year, I had some time to reflect, to think about who is our target audience 

for authors? We say it in our mandate that our journal is a good platform for beginning authors to 

gain publishing experience, but maybe, our beginning authors don’t have the resources, coaching 

or the mentorship to engage with the publication process yet. 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xiii 

Jon: I saw that as a barrier too. Sometimes we give lip service to research; we talk about it and its 

importance, but there’s not as much action toward completing it. Part of this inaction is that there 

is no formal guidance, or structured way into the publication world. I could see why students may 

say “Yes, I would love to be a published author,” but they don’t have the model to follow to help 

them through this process. Does that make sense? 

Brit: Yes, that is making sense. Actually, it’s almost like there is a hidden knowledge in academia 

about how to publish. We know how to write a paper because we’ve spent our entire undergraduate 

degree? experience? bridging up to writing a paper in grad school, but we don’t know how to write 

a manuscript because, well, we never had the opportunity to do so. Even when I went to seminars 

to learn about publishing, I found the information was mostly on where to publish rather than how 

to publish. Then I thought to myself, well, I know where to publish-it’s where everyone I am 

reading is publishing, but I don’t know how to get from writing a paper to turning the paper into a 

manuscript. I also know a lot of my peers don’t know how to get there. It’s like this underground 

knowledge almost, but people don’t know how to teach that either. 

Brianna: Like Brit, I found that most seminars are about how to choose journals. What we are 

working through right now with our authors is how to turn that term paper that is only read by your 

professor into a publishable manuscript, and this is what is missing from most advice and seminars, 

although it is the practical advice and training that students need. 

Teresa: It is similar to the hidden and implicit curriculum of graduate school...things that others 

just assume we know so they do not teach it outright. As graduate students, many of us are also 

research assistants. I find that many of these roles are often on the back burner, but your supervisor 

or the principal investigator does not stop, pause, and teach you how to publish, show you how to 

a develop a good manuscript, and give you examples of journals to publish. Maybe it is the 

expectation that we will learn this on our own, but publishing needs support and mentorship. 

Gina: You just made me think of something...in turns of sparking this interest, what about, moving 

forward, having faculty talk to their students and having them introduce us, our journal, and letting 

the students know that EPIGREP could be a place to start if they are thinking about publishing. I 

find that word of mouth, when you know someone and you personally invite them to submit a 

manuscript, it may be more effective and powerful than just letting them look up and find the 

journal. 

Jon: Gina, we could take your idea and go one step further. Could we get the journal incorporated 

as part of the curriculum? Most graduate courses require students to write a research paper, why 

not have the students write the paper for the journal? I think as we noted earlier, there is a not a 

well established culture for graduate students to be thinking of publishing, or that publishing is 

worth their time. If students were expected to create manuscript-level and styled papers in their 

courses, then that might provide the motivation and bridge that students need to get more 

enthusiastic about participating in the journal. 

Gina: I was also thinking about reaching out to our Research Advisory Committee and see how 

we can work with them to relay this message to faculty and have it also passed onto students. I 

think students would appreciate the mentorship from the faculty in their courses to prepare them to 

publish. 

Konstantinos: We can also take this suggestion to the Teaching and Learning Committee, I think 

they would be interested. They always ask about the journal, and what we are up to. We could take 

the idea, “How do we incorporate the journal into curriculum?” 

EPIGREP editors finding a balance 

Konstantinos: I realize that I have some accountability to my role as an editor. For me that has 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xiv 

been hard, especially when dealing with my doctoral candidacy process, trying to juggle that and 

other commitments, and then being accountable to the journal and being responsible to getting back 

to authors in a timely manner. This editorial position is voluntary, after all. I am not telling myself 

that this needs to be on the back burner because it is voluntary, but trying to do all these things, 

being a doctoral student, I am pretty sure it’s not just me because we all have our fingers in 20 

different pots. I was wondering if that’s a common experience, or across the board, other people 

have thought about those things? Just wondering…. 

Brit: I agree, Konstantinos, and thank you for bringing up this issue. We have our hands in various 

pots and we are trying to balance or juggle it all. I wonder whether our commitments to our own 

research, work, graduate training, etc., are interfering with our ability to be efficient to follow-up 

with authors to remind them to address our review comments and re-submit their manuscript for 

second or third review. As graduate students, we take courses, take on research and teaching 

assistantships, prepare and take candidacy exams, prepare for and present at conferences, and of 

course, work on our own research. These responsibilities take time, but the work we do as the 

journal editors is diverse, time-consuming, demands attention and our best effort. As editors, we 

all are doing initial reviews of manuscripts, choosing which reviewers should review the 

manuscript, overseeing and sometimes collaborating in the reviewing process, and then based on 

the review outcomes, we have to work with the authors and reviewers to process and coordinate 

the re-submission process. 

Maisha: We are all graduate  students and we are learning how to do our jobs as editors everyday. 

Yes, all these responsibilities that you just described, Brit, take time, focus, diligence, and 

sometimes mentorship that we are so fortunate that we are able to seek out from each other 

whenever needed. At the same, we also cannot compromise the work we have do as graduate 

students with respect to coursework, research, candidacy, internships, and the list goes on. 

Gina: Yes, we are definitely involved in various other work on top our own research. For me, I am 

sessional instructor, research assistant, and just completed my provisional hours towards 

registration as a psychologist. I am also a mom, partner, sister, and friend to those I love. However, 

this opportunity to be involved in such a grassroots and exciting initiative to collaborate with fellow 

students and be mentors in the publication process is invaluable. For me, I say yes to many roles 

because I know I have some skills, and the relationship cultivated with my peers is priceless. 

Teresa: I agree, totally, as much as I was looking to fill an emptiness and collaborate with grad 

students I also wonder about balance. Is all this hard work we are doing not going to open up 

opportunities for us? Then I remind myself that service is a large part of my life and whether or not 

anything transpires for me career-wise, I revel in the relationships I have built over the years with 

colleagues, peers, and past students. As stressful as it all gets, I like to think that this investment is 

paying off not only by our providing opportunities for other grad students to publish and review 

but now within this group we have built strong relationships with each other. 

Maisha: Yes, there is no doubt that creating the journal has been a rewarding process. However, I 

think we also should be less hard on ourselves and, like I said earlier, acknowledge that this position 

demands time. Brit, you are also right, if we think we are not responding to authors in a timely 

way, maybe we could take some pre-emptive measures to smooth the review and re-submission 

processes for our authors. Maybe it’s time to review our website to evaluate when an author is 

about to submit their manuscript, are they aware of the journal’s expectations and requirements? 

Maybe we need samples on our website? We are having ongoing discussions about creating video 

tutorials to support students to develop manuscripts, we should start working on that, and other 

resources that could be disseminated to help students with manuscript writing. 

Jon: That makes me think further about collaborating with our faculty. Like I mentioned earlier, if 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xv 

students are writing these manuscripts in their courses, they will be receiving mentorship from a 

faculty member, which will inherently strengthen their manuscripts and benefit the review process 

that we will undergo after. Basically, I think that the mentorship process can start happening even 

before the student gets to submitting their manuscript to EPIGREP. Perhaps this will increase our 

workload, if students start preparing manuscripts in their courses and submit en masse, however, I 

think that is mitigated by faculties’ expertise already being incorporated in the evaluation of the 

manuscript/paper. Is this how we find a balance between engaging students but also not overtaxing 

our already busy schedules? 

Brianna: I think the balancing acts that we are all doing underscore why collaboration and 

mentorship are so important. We can’t all do everything but sharing the load and being open to the 

help and expertise that are available are just some of the aspects of grad school that result in growth. 

Discussion. During our inaugural year, low student engagement and enthusiasm as well as 

our own struggles to strike a balance between our academic and work commitments and effectively 

operating the journal were two primary challenges that we experienced. Whenever we sought out 

mentorship from our faculty, we constantly sensed their enthusiasm and support for the journal, 

and these were invaluable in inspiring and empowering us to work towards our goals. 

Simultaneously, we also sensed that the journal did not spark a sufficient level of interest and 

enthusiasm among graduate students, our peers and colleagues. As we began to explore possible 

reasons to explain low student engagement and enthusiasm, we realized that publication skills like 

developing manuscripts and addressing reviewer’s comments are not explicitly built into our 

graduate curriculum. We as students do not typically receive step-by-step, concrete coaching in our 

graduate training to publish. Lack of coaching and mentorship for publication may discourage 

students from getting involved with the process and make the publication process more 

intimidating. Creating a journal and providing a platform to publish may not be enough to spark 

that enthusiasm, encouragement, and interest in students to publish if we do not establish proper 

avenues to foster engagement and participation between the journal and students. As we move 

forward, it will be important for the journal to develop and facilitate individualized mentorship 

opportunities and hands-on learning experiences for students to engage in the publishing process. 

As scholars (e.g., Johnson, 2013; Doran et al., 2014) in the field have suggested, these hands-on 

learning opportunities will allow students to gain skills and experiences which may not be available 

in their regular graduate curriculum and will then enhance their overall academic literacy. 

Our second challenge illustrated our own struggle as editors to create an adequate balance in 

our day-to-day life to keep up with our diverse commitments. As graduate students, we are tied to 

many commitments and deadlines, and they take up most of our daily schedules. Consequently, 

during the year we sometimes struggled to manage our academic commitments and simultaneously 

find adequate time and opportunities to effectively fulfill our responsibilities and obligations as the 

journal editors, which are also plenty. At times, we were delayed in responding and following up 

with our authors, which undoubtedly elicited feelings of guilt and inadequacy in us. Therefore, we 

explored ways in which we could re-structure our responsibilities by collaborating with faculty. 

For example, if authors are submitting manuscripts which were developed under the mentorship of 

a faculty member, then our editorial and reviewing responsibilities may be reduced to some extent. 

Our experience in the past year reflects the amount of time and commitment warranted in student-

led initiatives and illuminates how faculty collaboration, mentorship, and peer-support could 

alleviate the stress we experience juggling our commitments and creating a balance in our lives. 

Question 3: How Do We Wish to Empower Journal Users and Ourselves Through the Publication 
Process? 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xvi 

We envision the journal to be a platform for peer-supportive learning and mentorship for 

publication not only for our authors, but for ourselves as well. Hence, we wanted to take the 

opportunity to listen to each other’s perspectives as to how we wish to empower our authors and 

ourselves through the publication process, our third research question. After reading our stories in 

this regard, two main themes emerged. First, we discussed how we wish to empower our peers to 

help them develop confidence and take pride in the work they do as student researchers. Second, 

as we reflected on our own personal growth, we noted that the journal taught us to learn to trust 

our strengths and contributions that we can make as student researchers and editors. Our 

conversations, representative of these themes, are written below. 

Cultivating confidence to publish 

Gina: We are graduate students for a reason, we are here in our lives because we do know things. 

My message to students is that you know that you are becoming one of the experts in your field, 

so you have lots to say and write about. You might as well take the extra step to get your knowledge 

and findings disseminated so more people can read your work and what you are passionate about. 

Brianna: Yeah, it is important to accept that boldness that yes, I do know some things. It is also 

important to accept that publishing is a learning process, and the first step to that process is to try. 

Just try it. 

Maisha: Exactly what I was thinking, Brianna. Publication is a learning process. When we choose 

our area of study for research, our interest in the topics reflects our enjoyment and passion for the 

research we do. I hope the journal helps to cultivate that similar nature of enjoyment in students 

with respect to publishing and scholarly reviewing. I hope that the process of publication instills 

pride and confidence in the work students do, and that they see the feedback and coaching they 

receive from their reviewers as opportunities to learn and grow as authors. 

Jon: I hope that beginning authors to the journal know that we as editors once stood where they 

stand; we remember how confusing and difficult it was to work toward publication. We didn’t just 

wake up one day and think, ‘hey, I can be an editor of a journal.’ We built our confidence in 

publication slowly but surely, and it culminated in our current roles, but we faced many obstacles 

along the way as well. 

Brit: Precisely. The first time, the process can be scary, intimidating, or even painful. It is hard not 

to take revisions personally, but tear off that band-aid and start the process. As beginning authors, 

it helps to have a mindset that revisions are there to improve your writing, don’t view them as 

setbacks. 

Konstantinos: Also, despite feeling overwhelmed by the publication process - especially for first-

time authors - it is important for students to remember that there are resources they can rely on 

which can help improve their writing. Peers with publication experience or research supervisors 

can potentially serve as such resources by boosting graduate student authors’ confidence regarding 

their academic prose. In addition, they can normalize potentially undesirable publication outcomes, 

e.g., manuscript rejection, or resubmission with major revisions, and act as role-models who 

underwent similar experiences in the past and, thus, can demystify for new graduate student authors 

the process of disseminating our research through publication. 

Teresa: It is not easy putting yourself out there, but the risk is worth it. Hesitation and worries are 

understandable, but imagine what great books and articles may have never made it to print if the 

author had not taken a risk to say this is worthy, this is good enough for me to share. So, do not be 

so critical on your work or ideas that they never leave your computer or journal. I would also like 

to tell our authors that as the editor, I have learned to read deeply the work that is coming in and 

provide feedback that does not turn away an author but empowers them to do better. 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xvii 

Maisha: Then as editors, we should also pay close attention to the feedback and comments that 

our authors are receiving from their reviewers. Is the feedback useful? Empowering or overly harsh 

or critical? If the feedback is not useful or doesn’t provide concrete directions on how to improve 

their manuscripts, then the author may be discouraged or less motivated to continue with the 

publication process. 

Learning to Trust our Strengths and Contributions 

Gina: What have we learned about ourselves through this process? For me I see it as practicing 

self-compassion. I learned to give myself permission to ask questions and reach out for help with 

things. I would also like to model that process with our student authors. When you are working on 

a paper and submit it for review, it is understandably an anxious process, but that paper does not 

have to be perfect. There’s a team of people here in our journal that authors can learn from and 

that’s really powerful. 

Jon: Similar to what Gina said, I can be humble about what I don’t know, but I can also be bold 

about what I do know. Being with the journal has given me the confidence to be bold in putting 

myself forward in whatever expertise I do have. As editors who are also students, we all have 

expertise at this point in our research area. My mentors have been saying this for awhile and 

logically this made sense, but being in the journal, I have felt what they were saying. 

Brit: As the only master’s student in the room, surrounded by people with much more experience 

and expertise than I have, like Jon said, I realized I do actually have expertise in certain areas and 

I can be confident in that knowledge. It’s really helped with my confidence in applying to 

conferences and then the subsequent presentation. 

Maisha: I agree, learning to be bold about what I do know. Being involved in various 

responsibilities as a journal editor, I now feel more confident to share my expertise in the area that 

I have received training and experiences. This position definitely adds to the confidence I take with 

me to a room when I am being asked to speak about my research. I think, interestingly, along with 

my research work, this journal position has also helped to identify the passion I have for research 

teaching and mentorship. 

Teresa: Talking about mentorship, I think the collaborative opportunities that the journal offers 

have been empowering to me. For example, as the book review editor, I have books from all of our 

departments so when I run into, “Oh, is this really what the book is saying,” I know I can rely on 

one of fellow editors for assistance. 

Konstantinos: I definitely also appreciate the collaborative opportunities. I used to be a huge 

perfectionist but I think I have worked to relinquish that. I find it most beneficial to work in a group 

because there’s that collaboration and you allow disagreements to be settled through democracy. 

Brianna: For me, this process has helped me to realize that we are not alone. It can feel like we 

are the only ones who struggle with creating manuscripts, or providing good feedback, but, in this 

and all collaborative processes, we can see that others have the same struggles, and we can work 

through them together. 

Discussion.  For beginning authors and students, the publication process could be daunting 

and anxiety provoking. It may be difficult to muster the courage and confidence to submit their 

own work for an evaluation that determines whether their work is worth sharing with the scholarly 

community. Reflecting on our own growth as first-year graduate students to authors, and now to 

editors, we hope that the publication process with the journal allows graduate students, our peers, 

to gain confidence about the skills, achievement, and the expertise they have developed so far in 

their academic careers. When we are confident and we take pride in the research work we do and 

the papers we write, it helps us to take risks and submit it for publication. It may be easier to take 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        

xviii 

that risk when we realize that the publication is, after all, a learning process. As graduate students, 

we are always learning, and it is our occupation, so we know we can learn. Once we take the 

feedback from our reviewers as opportunities to grow and be better storytellers of the research we 

are doing, we may even learn to enjoy the publication process and take pride in the progress we 

made. With respect to EPIGREP specifically, we hope that the individualized mentorship and 

coaching facilitated through the publication process also empowers our authors. 

With respect to our own growth as editors, involvement with the journal has further 

reinforced our beliefs in our strengths, expertise, and the skills we have developed so far as young 

academics. The journal has enhanced our sense of self-efficacy to provide expertise in the areas we 

have training and experiences in. Additionally, the journal has brought us to a peer-supported 

community that allows us to learn from each other, collaborate with each other, and work together 

on our common goals to empower graduate students and become future scholars. 

Implications and Future Directions 

A review of the educational research literature indicates the need for and benefits of greater 

graduate student involvement in scholarly activities that transcend typical class requirements 

(Austin & McDaniels, 2006; Garbati & Samuels, 2013; Ni Uigin et al., 2015). Aspiring to enhance 

the research culture in the WSE, University of Calgary, we aimed to build upon and strengthen an 

already existing academic capital (Bourdieu, 1977) by establishing a student-managed academic 

journal. In keeping with Mezirow’s (1991) transformative learning theory, we sought to create a 

platform that would allow graduate students in education and psychology to equip themselves with 

the necessary skills required to facilitate the pursuit of an academic career. Using Norris and 

Sawyer’s (2012) duo-ethnographic approach, we, the founding editors of EPIGREP, reflected on 

our hopes regarding the agentic potential of the journal, i.e., how it might address current gaps in 

academic graduate training and learning, respectively, the various challenges we experienced 

during the journal’s inaugural year, and the ways in which we might mobilize fellow graduate 

students to actively participate in academic scholarship. 

Our analysis of the stories shared shed light on several integral aspects pertaining to 

managing a graduate student research journal. Important questions arose with respect to the editors 

juggling their academic commitments to find time to fulfill their responsibilities with the journal, 

and student engagement in the publication process. In alignment with studies indicating 

underrepresentation of student authorship in published research (Garbati & Samuels, 2013), in our 

conversations we identified that there is an increasing need for students to have individualized 

mentorship and skill development opportunities to learn to how to publish and be active student 

researchers, along with having a journal platform such as EPIGREP to encourage participation in 

publication. In addition to our ongoing efforts to promote and advertise EPIGREP locally, 

nationally, and internationally, we are now aware that it will be important to for us to collaborate 

with our faculty and committees at WSE to begin to fill that gap and provide mentorship 

opportunities for students to gain skills and experiences to engage and participate in publications. 

Therefore, we should explore and develop initiatives in which students receive instructional 

mentorship for publication and academic literacy. 

A concrete step towards that direction, for example, would to be have journal-faculty 

collaboration in which certain courses from each of the Werklund educational specialization areas 

(e.g., Learning Sciences, Counselling Psychology) will have assignments that will be required to 

be written in a manuscript format, which could then be submitted to EPIGREP. It is our hope that 

this kind of course assignment will not only encourage research participation in students, but will 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xix 

also allow students to be mentored on publication from both the faculty and EPIGREP. Therefore, 

we continue to lobby relevant WSE committees such as the Research Advisory Committee (RAC) 

and the Graduate Programs in Education Council (GPEC) to move this proposal forward. The 

mandate of the RAC is to provide strategic guidance in support of the goals of the Office of 

Research at WSE. Particularly, RAC is responsible to advise on matters related to research 

development at WSE as well as recommending policies and processes relevant to research at the 

School. GPEC is responsible to advise the WSE on matters relating to curriculum and overall 

structure of existing graduate programs within the School. Hence, GPEC examines and approves 

proposed course changes and supports coordination of graduate programs and initiatives to increase 

cooperation across educational specialization areas in the School. Given our proposal for journal-

faculty collaboration as discussed earlier, RAC and GPEC seem to be the appropriate committees 

to seek collaboration and potentially develop initiatives like incorporating publication-based 

assignments into graduate curriculum. 

Furthermore, we are continuously trying to create a peer-supported learning environment 

through the journal platform to provide increased support, scaffolding, and mentorship 

opportunities to reviewers and authors submitting their work to EPIGREP. Presently, we are 

working to improve the online application and submission processes, offer online training modules 

and videos in response to the needs identified by several of the EPIGREP editors to support and 

engage students in publication. 

Finally, creating and running a student-led, peer-reviewed journal has been a rewarding but 

also challenging undertaking. What has been key in our developing a better grasp of roles, 

responsibilities, as well as the steps involved in the editorial process itself is peer support and peer-

mentoring. Since our editorial team is comprised of graduate students with varying degrees of 

familiarity regarding the publication process, we have been open to learning from one another to 

ensure that we fulfill our roles with integrity, and following the same protocol that other peer-

reviewed publications adhere to. Similarly, given that many of the manuscripts we receive for 

publication may be coming from graduate students who are first-time authors, we strive to make 

ourselves available to them as a resource. For instance, we provide mentorship to authors whose 

work may not be up to standard for publication, yet there is ample potential for revisions that would 

help turn that work into publishable material. 

Conclusion 

In much the same way that a rope is made stronger from being made up of many different 

strands, our varied perspectives and responses to both our successes and challenges have enriched 

our experiences as individual editors managing our graduate student research publication, 

EPIGREP. In this article, our separate voices lent themselves nicely to using duo-ethnography, 

helping us make sense of the commitment to and processes of establishing a peer-reviewed 

academic journal. Our hope is that, by sharing our experiences with EPIGREP, we are furthering 

the conversation about graduate student involvement in research and academic publishing. This 

involvement, albeit laden with potential challenges, can incur significant benefits for graduate 

programs’ training, graduate student learning and skill development, and future academic careers. 

References 

Austin, A. E. (2002). Preparing the next generation of faculty: Graduate school as socialization to 

the academic career. Journal of Higher Education 73(1), 94–12. Retrieved from 

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1558449 



Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xx 

 

Austin, A. E., & McDaniels, M. (2006). Preparing the professoriate of the future: Graduate student 

socialization for faculty roles. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory 

and Research (Vol. XXI, pp. 397–456). Springer Netherlands. 

Boud, D., & Lee, A. (2005). ‘Peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education.

 Studies in Higher Education, 30, 501-516. doi: 10.1080/03075070500249138 

Bourdieu, P., & Nice, R. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (21st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge 

University Press. 

Clark, M. C. (1993). Transformational learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing 

Education, (57), 47–56. doi:10.1002/ace.36719935707  

Clark, C., & Dirk, J. (2008). The emotional self in adult learning. In J. M. Dirk (Ed.), Adult

 learning and the emotional self (pp. 89-95). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Colvin, J.W., & Ashman, M. (2010). Roles, risks and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in

 higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(2), 121-134. doi:  

 10.1080/13611261003678879 

Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformative learning (2nd ed.). San 

Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. 

Doran, J. M., Somerville, W., Harlem-Siegel, J., & Steele, H. (2014). The more you know: The 

impact of publication and peer-review experience on psychology graduate students. Teaching 

of Psychology, 41(2), 122–129. doi: 10.1177/0098628314530342 

Ethington, C. A., & Pisani, A. (1993). The RA and TA experience: Impediments and benefits to 

graduate study. Research in Higher Education 34(3), 343–354.  

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40196051 

English, L. M., & Irving, C. J. (2012). Women and transformative learning. In E.W. Taylor & P. 

Cranton (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice 

(pp. 245-259). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Garbati, J., & Samuels, B. (2013). Publishing in educational research journals: Are graduate 

students participating? Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 44(4), 355–372.    

doi:10.3138/jsp.44-4-004 

Heilman E., Mayer, S., Mountain A., & Pritchard, P. (Eds.), Democratic responses in an era of 

standardization (pp. 139–159). Troy, NY: Educators International Press. 

Johnson, K. (2013). Creating experiential learning in the graduate classroom through community 

engagement. American Journal of Business Education, 6(1), 149–155. Retrieved from 

http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1418449932?a

ccountid=9838 

Maldonado, D.E.Z., Rhoads, R., & Buenavista, T.L. (2005). The student-initiated retention 

 project: Theoretical contributions and the role of self-empowerment. American 

 Educational Research Journal, 42, 605-638. doi: 10.3102/00028312042004605 

Meriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2012). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive 

guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

http://doi.org/10.1177/0098628314530342
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40196051


Syeda, Woodend, Ko, Fowler, Chondros, Hilman, Paris / Emerging Perspectives (2017) ii i-xxi                        xxi 

 

Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100–110. 

doi:10.1177/074171367802800202 

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Nabavi, M., & Lund, D. E. (2012). Tensions and contradictions of living in a multicultural nation 

in an era of bounded identities. In J. Norris, R. Sawyer, & D. E. Lund (Eds.), Duoethnography 

(pp. 177-197). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. 

Noonan, M. J., Ballinger, R., & Black, R. (2007). Peer and faculty mentoring in doctoral education: 

Definitions, experiences, and expectations. International Journal of Teaching and Learning 

in Higher Education, 19(3), 251-262. Retrieved from:   

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ901298.pdf 

Norris, J. (2008). Duoethnography. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative 

research methods (pp. 234-237). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Norris, J., & Sawyer, R. (2004). Null and hidden curricula of sexual orientation: A dialogue on the 

curreres of the absent presence and the present absence. In L. Coia, M. Birch, N. J. Brooks, 

Norris, J., & Sawyer, R. (2012). Towards a dialogic methodology. In J. Norris, R. Sawyer & D. 

Lund (Eds.), Duoethnography (pp. 9-39). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. 

Randall, W. L. (1996) “Restorying a life: Adult education and transformative learning.” In J. E. 

Birren, G. M. Kenyon, J. Ruth, J. J. F. Schroots, & T. Svensson (Eds.), Aging and biography: 

Explorations in adult development (pp. 99-142). New York, NY: Springer. 

Sawyer, R., & Norris, J. (2012a). A living method. In R. Sawyer & J. Norris (Eds.), 

Duoethnography (pp. 53-82). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 

Sawyer, R., & Norris, J. (2012b). Introduction. In R. Sawyer & J. Norris (Eds.), Duoethnography 

(pp. 1-30). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 

Sawyer, R., & Norris, J. (2012c). Research design. In R. Sawyer & J. Norris (Eds.), 

Duoethnography (pp. 31-52). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 

Sawyer, R., & Norris, J. (2012d). Writing duoethnographies. In R. Sawyer & J. Norris (Eds.), 

Duoethnography (pp. 83-104). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 

Schillebeeck, M., Maricque, B., & Lewis, C. (2013). The missing piece to changing the university 

culture. Nature Biotechnology, 31, 938–941. 

Taylor, E. W. (1997). Building upon the theoretical debate: A critical review of the empirical 

studies of Mezirow’s transformative learning theory. Adult Education Quarterly,48(1), 34-

59. doi:10.1177/074171369704800104 

Taylor, E. W., & Cranton, P. (2012). Transformative learning: Seeking a more unified theory. In 

E.W. Taylor & P. Cranton (Eds.), The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, 

research and practice (pp. 3-20). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Williams, I. D. (2006). Southern community women teach a new generation lessons of leadership 

for social change. Journal of Transformative Education, 4(3), 257–274. 

doi:10.1177/1541344606290451 


