This roundtable is designed for PhD, EdD, and MPhil students, as well as early-career researchers, who are interested in publishing in technology-enhanced language learning (TELL) journals. Rather than offering a conventional talk on publication tips, the session approaches academic publishing through three complementary roles that shape how research is evaluated and circulated in the field: associate editor, author, and reviewer. From the associate editor’s perspective, drawing on editorial experience at Language Learning & Technology, the discussion will consider what journal editors look for when assessing submissions: fit with scope, clarity of contribution, theoretical grounding, methodological rigor, and the extent to which a manuscript engages meaningfully with ongoing conversations in the field. From the author’s perspective, the session will reflect on the challenges of developing a research idea into a publishable article, selecting an appropriate journal, framing a study convincingly, and responding productively to reviewer feedback. From the reviewer’s perspective, the roundtable will examine how manuscripts are often read critically, what common weaknesses tend to undermine submissions, and how peer review can be understood not only as gatekeeping but also as a form of scholarly dialogue. The session will be especially relevant to those working on topics such as digital literacies, informal language learning, technology-mediated pedagogy, and artificial intelligence in language education, though participants from related areas will also benefit. Throughout the discussion, attention will be given to what distinguishes stronger manuscripts from merely competent ones, including analytical depth, conceptual precision, and a contribution that moves beyond descriptive accounts of technology use. Participants will be invited to bring their own questions, article ideas, or publication concerns into the conversation. The aim is to create an open and collegial space in which emerging scholars can better understand the publication process, sharpen their sense of what journals expect, and develop more confident pathways from research project to publishable article.
Boris Vázquez-Calvo (Thu,) studied this question.