Kyle Paziuk is a Political Science student at the University of Alberta who recently published an article in the Political Science Undergraduate Review (PSUR). When interviewed about the experience, he said that “what you get out of it is far more than the work you have to put into it.” Read further to hear about Kyle’s research, his experience submitting multiple articles to the PSUR, and how his opinion on receiving feedback on his writing changed in a positive way.
Introduce yourself (name, pronouns, program, name of paper, anything else interesting about you or your work)
“Hi, I’m Kyle (pronouns he/him), I’m in the Honors program of Political Science in my fourth year, and the name of my paper is “Virtue and Virtu: A Debate in the Importance of Values and Justice for Leaders of State”.”
What inspired you to research the specific topic of your paper?
“I wrote it in June of 2020, which was a year after the provincial election in Alberta where the UCP won and Jason Kenney became the premier. At that time, Alberta hadn’t changed that much [as a result of the election] but I think we knew that it was going to, and I think that election was about the kind of leader that we want to have and the kind of province we want to be, so that kind of pushed me [to write about it]. Also looking at the US and knowing that they were trending toward an election, and [thinking about] what happened to them during their last one and what was about to happen in their next one, and just trying to choose the kind of leaders we want and the qualities that those leaders represent in all of us when we elect them to office.”
What was the most interesting thing you learned from researching your paper?
“I think the reason why the words are in the title of the paper is because of the difference in definition: when I wrote those, I had just read The Republic ... and then when you read The Prince, you realize that the meaning of what the leaders have to act like and be like and the qualities they have to have are quite different according to Macchiaveli and Plato. So I think the biggest difference was just seeing through history how those qualities change, and how they represent the people that those leaders are elected to represent. And that surprised me for sure - Plato obviously being one of the original minds of politics, and Macchiaveli coming later - just seeing how much [the qualities] changed was probably the biggest thing that I found most interesting.”
What made you want to submit to the PSUR?
“I had heard about [the PSUR] through a class talk or two and Instagram. I actually remember being on my couch one night, going through my papers and anonymizing them, and I sent eight or nine in - really hoping maybe one caught their eye, but not thinking that any of them would, frankly - I didn’t think much of it, and then I remember getting an email about it a couple of weeks later, and then the process got going. So it was casual at the beginning and my hopes weren’t up by any means, but I’m happy with how it turned out.”
A related question - how did you identify which papers you wanted to submit?
“Like I said, I sent in eight or nine - they were all pretty different. I put in pretty much every one that got an A- or above, and knowing that they were all different and covered a lot of topics I was hoping that one would be chosen for that reason. So obviously one was, and I’m happy about that, but they were all different and I had no clue which one was going to make it - if any - because their topics were all so varying.”
What was the peer-review and copyediting process like for you? And what was the most valuable part?
“Until now, I was the kind of person who did not like asking for people’s opinions on my papers. I was kind of in my own little world, and I would edit quite a bit but I would usually get to the place that I wanted to go on my own and without a lot of help from others and others’ views and comments. And for the most part it hadn’t hurt me so far - it had led me to some very good papers. So I found that at the beginning, the peer review process was a bit more involved than I expected - it was a lot of emails and back and forth - but over time I came to really appreciate it. It definitely changed my opinion on having other people read your work. I’m going into an Honors project this year and we’re always reading each others’ work and I think that’s easier because I had to go through this process with the PSUR. So it definitely changed my opinion on getting feedback from others.”
So, you submitted your paper earlier and now you’re on the team as a peer reviewer. What led to that process of you wanting to then join the team and peer review for other people’s papers?
“I remember the application going out and thinking ‘I’ve never worked in this kind of job before’; however, I had gone through the process so I was hoping that was going to help me in the interview and in what would be asked of me. I was curious to be on the other end of it. In a sense, I didn’t want to go through the process again - I kind of wanted to be on the other side of it and see how that goes. After submitting once, I was more curious to see the inner workings [of the PSUR] and to read more, too. You get to read a lot of papers by doing this, and not just your own, which like I said, I learned over the past year that you learn a lot from reading other peoples’ work, so that’s a big reason that pushed me to do it.”
What would you say to someone who is considering submitting their work to the PSUR? Is there any advice you would give or any recommendations?
“I would say that what you get out of it is far more than the work you have to put into it. There is work you have to put into it - in the peer review process you’re quite involved and making the changes that are recommended and you’re in a dialogue with your editor - it takes some time, but it’s very laid back for the most part. What you can take out of it from the lessons and from having a person help you along the way is a lot more important than the time it takes to actually edit your paper. So I think that would be the most important thing. Submitting your papers is very casual, the peer review process is very casual, but the lessons are not casual: they are important and they’re helpful.”
Want to submit your essay to the PSUR? Find more information on our website.