First panel of day 2 for me is a roundtable on publishing papers for grad students.
First editor to talk is on time pressure for publishing papers, and concerns over the time taken to publish. Suggestion that targeting particular journals in writing style helps - time wasted by new academics with mistargeted submissions.
Editor of Speculum next, starts by saying that Speculum has rapidly improved turnaround times/clarity in recent years despite bad past rep for slowness.
Does have ninety percent rejection rate - large wide ranging journals of this type are swamped for submissions.
Medieval Feminist Forum journal editor next. MFF, a small journal, is all online now, printing costs having been too high to continue producing on paper. Smaller reviewer range makes it harder for some small journals to keep up to fast turnaround times.
Problem of inexperienced folk submitting chapters or seminar papers without properly turning them into papers with the clarity needed for a journal's readership, oft broader than for eg a PhD thesis. Pieces often too narrow for them.
Also he suggests to check journals for their submission process - some have specific time frames, some have more arduous review processes.
And enquire about timing to establish a working basis after which to get in touch and enquire further if progress has not been made. Authors *can* pull the plug on editors if timing too slow compared to estimations, something newer students are likely to be nervous of.