Search

Peer review is the evaluation of scientific, academic, or professional work by experts in the field. This process starts when the editor of a peer‑reviewed journal sends an article or a manuscript to two or more reviewers for review. They convey their suggestions to the editor. If the reviews are positive, the editor requests the authors to revise and resubmit the manuscript. The corresponding author provides a point‑wise explanation of the various queries raised by the reviewers and resubmits the paper. The editor may send the paper for re‑review, following which the editor makes the final decision. If accepted, the author is informed, and the paper is published. The peer review process has many variations such as blinded review (single or double blind), open review, and collaborative review. Each variant has its pros and cons. Peer review, when done before publication in a journal, has the advantage of producing papers that have undergone thorough scrutiny of their research question, methodology, and outcomes. Although this process may take more time compared to other methods, it has stood the test of time as a key quality control mechanism in scientific publishing. The reviewer should be unbiased and professional in his/her conduct and provide constructive feedback to improve the research paper. Several journals provide a checklist for peer reviewers, which facilitates a detailed review. Peer reviewing is a skill that improves the quality of publication at the level of an individual manuscript and benefits the scientific community at large. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As scholarly communication becomes more multimodal in nature, research articles embrace semiotic resources in appended genres such as the graphical abstract (GA). As an established genre in Chemistry research articles, GAs visually remediate chemical processes or research niche. However, this genre still remains in a peripheral area of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses as ESP practitioners mainly focus on textual modes. With limited opportunities to compose GAs, students foster genre remediation skills that are limited to textual genres only, ignoring the potential of reading-to-design skills. Upon student composition and critical reflections on GAs, as well as qualitative and quantitative data collection from a survey and interview involving professors, young researchers (YRs) and students, this paper examines rhetorical functions as well as image and text relations, while throwing some light on skills and challenges involved when GA composition is intentionally embedded in an ESP course, and discusses ensuing pedagogical implications. • Switching from reading-to-write to reading-to-design skills. • Embedding critical visual literacy tasks and student remediation of RAs. • Visual remediation awareness through student agency and reflection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]