| Submission Information Thank you for your expression of interest in
publishing your writing with Dulwich Centre Publications.
The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work
If you are interesting in publishing your writing with us, it is most likely
that you will be wishing to publish in this journal. Four issues are produced
each year. Most issues are orientated around a particular theme and we place
information about these themes in advance up on our web site.
Throughout the course of a year, we receive many more
manuscripts that we can hope to publish and while this is lovely (we like
receiving manuscripts from people!), it also means that unfortunately we have
to turn away many people’s writings. We always try to assist prospective
authors to find other publishing avenues or other ways in which to distribute
the ideas about which they are writing to the people who would most benefit
from them.
Publishing is in many ways about distributing ideas,
making links and building a sense of community through the written word. Even
if we cannot publish someone’s writing in our journal or books, we try to find
ways in which ideas can be distributed and further links made. We seek to
ensure that authors who submit their work for publication have a positive
experience of the process, even if we are unable to publish their writing.
General publishing principles
The following principles guide our
publishing:
1. Opening space for conversations
We aim to publish writings which open space for conversation. The
emphasis is on the sharing of story rather than polemics or statements
of fact. We hope with each publication to engage readers’ own
thoughtfulness and to contribute to discussions within the field.
2. The person / community is not
the problem
We aim to publish writings which are consistent with the principle
that the ‘person is not the problem, the problem is the problem’. In
other words, we publish papers which are written from a non-pathologising
stance and that are broadly congruent with the ideas of narrative
practice.
3. Care with the politics of
representation
We want people to have a chance to represent their own experience in the
writings rather than authors representing the experiences of others. At
the very least this means that, wherever appropriate, anyone referred to
in the writings has a chance to read and reflect on the ways in which
they have been represented. We also aim to take care with the politics
of representation in relation to issues of gender, class, race, sexual
preference, culture, ability and age.
4. Direct relevance to
practitioners
We aim for our publications to offer writings of direct relevance to
practitioners. We prioritise descriptions of hopeful and helpful work
which will provide practical ideas to those working in the field.
5. Seeking new authors
As much as is possible, we are always seeking to publish a
significant amount of work from new authors, those who have not
published their work before. Many good practitioners don’t have a sense
that they could write up their work for publication, and we see it as
part of our role to offer support, encouragement and collaboration. We
are particularly interested in generating opportunities for young
authors and authors from perspectives/communities/cultures whose work
and ideas are generally under-represented in the written word.
6. Collective processes of review
to forecast possible effects of each paper
Publishing is a collective process. Prior to publication, each piece is
read by a significant number of people: to try to forecast the possible
effects of the paper on a range of different readers; to check accuracy;
to receive feedback on how it could be improved; to address issues
relating to the politics of representation; and so on. This is always
invigorating. There is a sense of anticipation that is associated with
receiving this initial feedback prior to the publication because
people’s responses are impossible to predict. What is often most
interesting are the differences in response depending upon the cultural
background, gender, class, sexuality of the reader. We wish to encourage
practitioners to write about their work and so try to make their
experience of submitting their work a good one. Developing a
constructive formal review process for the International Journal of
Narrative Therapy and Community Work has been a key part of this.
Importantly, these collective processes of review also generate
connections between practitioners, further enriching relationships
within a community of ideas.
7. Expanding the thinking and
parameters of narrative practice
Another principle involves publishing new work which expands our
thinking and the parameters of narrative practice. We do not want to be
simply confirming what is already familiar. Sometimes manuscripts are
sent to us that introduce new therapeutic practices and ways of thinking
about therapy and/or community work. At other times, one person’s
dedication to a particular topic breaks new ground. This was
particularly true in relation to the special issue of the Dulwich Centre
Newsletter on sexual abuse by priests, therapists and other
professionals. Ann Epston (1993) was committed to raising this issue in
professional networks before many others were discussing it. We also put
significant effort into researching and seeking out challenging
perspectives from outside the field which will contribute to
invigorating narrative practice. In recent years, the
work of Esben Esther Pirelli Benestad on bi-gender, transgender
perspectives (2001), and the work of America Bracho on community work
approaches (2000) have significantly
influenced discussions in the field through the publication of their
work and their presentations at conferences. Publishing interviews with
leaders of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Boraine 1998), with
Joan Nestle about her work with the Lesbian Herstory Archives (2003),
with Noam Chomsky (1995), and others, has had the effect of stretching
our thinking and inviting new conversations. Similar challenges have
also come from publishing the work of various community groups. A
considerable percentage of the papers we publish are not written from
the standpoint of ‘professional knowledge’ but instead contain the
stories, perspectives, and ideas of those who
have sought counselling, or are involved in community organising. These
perspectives from ‘outside’ the professional realm make a significant
contribution to refreshing and reconceptualising therapeutic practice.
8. The effects of the process of
publishing
Many narrative therapists are interested in the significant effects that
documentation can have within a therapeutic process. While the
publications we create are by no means primarily ‘therapeutic’, we try
to make the process of publication a rewarding one for authors. This is
most relevant when we are documenting the stories and insider knowledges
of individuals and groups who have experienced significant trauma and/or
abuse. It is our experience that when care is taken around these
processes,
documents can be created which richly describe the skills and knowledges
of the particular individual or group and that offer a great deal to
therapists and community workers, while simultaneously contributing to a
further reduction in the effects of trauma or abuse in the lives of the
author(s) (see WOWSAFE 2002, Silent Too Long 2000, Cecily 1998).
9. Archiving history
While our primary focus remains on looking ahead and the development of
new ideas, practices and conversations, we are aware that the written
word also serves as a key forum for the documentation of history. The
field of narrative therapy and community work is relatively young and
yet it is developing very quickly. In differing ways, our publications
seek to document the history of this field. Perhaps the most obvious
example of archiving history was the creation of the book: Family
Therapy: Exploring the
field’s past, present and possible futures (Denborough 2001). We
recognised that some younger practitioners who are vitally interested in
narrative practice were not necessarily aware of how these ideas were
linked to various family therapy traditions. We are interested in
documenting the history of therapeutic and community work ideas
and practices in ways that assist practitioners.
10.Responding to social issues
Finally, we also use the written word as a way to respond to current
social issues. For more information click here
Collaborative processes
Many of the papers that end up being published in the International Journal of
Narrative Therapy and Community Work are the result of collaborative processes
between the author(s) and Dulwich Centre Publications. Many papers originate
as interviews, and considerable collaboration often takes place in relation to
drafts and re-writes. We greatly value the process of these collaborations and
believe that these processes are as important as the final outcome.
Review process
We have a formal review process for all papers
for the International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work. Once we
are seriously considering a paper for publication we send it off for peer review by
at least two members of the International Advisory Group.
This Advisory group consists of members from Mexico,
Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Norway, Ireland, Denmark,
Austria, Israel, UK and USA. We have listed here the current members of the
International Advisory Group:
Norma Akamatsu, Makungu Akinyela, Elsa Almaas, Chris Beels, Esben Esther Pirelli Benestad,
America Bracho, Maggie Carey, Susanna Chamberlain, Gene Combs, Saviona Cramer,
Vicki Dickerson, David Epston, Jill Freedman, Yael Gershoni, Kenneth
V. Hardy, Rachel Hare-Mustin, Ann Hartman, Mark Hayward, Allan Holmgren, Alan
Jenkins, Maxine Joy, Zoy Kazan, Dirk Kotzé, Rudi
Kronbichler, Joan Laird, Tracey Laszloffy, Bill Lax, Dean Lobovits, Geir
Lundby, Stephen
Madigan, Elspeth McAdam, Vanessa McAdams-Mahmoud, Imelda McCarthy, Jonathan Morgan, Margaret Newmark, Marilyn O’Neill, Amaryll Perlesz,
Loretta Perry, Amanda Redstone, Colin Riess, Sallyann Roth,
Shona Russell, Olga Silverstein, Yvonne Sliep, Jane Speedy, Gaye Stockell,
Taimalieutu Kiwi Tamasese, Angela Tsun, Charles Waldegrave, Kaethe Weingarten, Michael White, Barbara Wingard,
John Winslade, Jeff Zimmerman
A transparent review process
We have taken care to develop an alternative review process to the ‘blind
review process’ that characterises the publication of many journals. We do not
believe that anonymity is necessary in order to offer clear, honest feedback.
At the same time we wish to provide reviewers with a context to be direct with
us as publishers, about our publishing responsibilities.
The process we have developed
is as follows:
* A couple
of members of the Advisory Group are approached to formally review each
major paper. * Authors are informed as to who we have approached
to formally review their paper. * We ask reviewers a
series of questions that are
related to our responsibilities as publishers. The answers to these will
only be read by those at Dulwich Centre Publications. * We also ask reviewers to write a paragraph
directly to the author summarising their response to the paper * If the paper is accepted for publication, a small
number of other members of the Advisory Group and/or others are asked to
offer reflections on the paper. These reflections are passed directly to the
author.
It is our hope that this alternative review process
addresses both our responsibilities as publishers as well as trying to ensure
a good experience for authors.
Word limits
We don't have strict word limits although most of the papers we publish are
less than 5,000 words. We believe that these matters can be negotiated in
collaboration with authors down the track.
With all this in mind, we look forward to receiving
your manuscript. This can either be posted to us: Hutt St PO Box 7192
Adelaide, 5000 South Australia
Or Emailed to us:
dulwich@senet.com.au
We look forward to reading your writing and getting
back to you as soon as we can.
Warm regards,
Cheryl White
David Denborough
Dulwich Centre Publications
Formal review questions:
These are the questions we send to reviewers to inform the
peer review process.
We would appreciate your responses to
the following questions. If you cannot respond to each of these questions,
then please use them as a guide to your review.
-
After reading this paper, are you
thinking differently about any aspect of your own practice as a therapist?
If so, how? What difference, if any, will the reading of this paper make to
your work?
Your response to this final question
will be forwarded to the author:
Back
|