Kairos uses a three-stage review process. First, editors decide if a submission makes sense for a review. Then, the entire editorial board discusses the submission (online) for two weeks, and reaches a consensus that is communicated to the author with detailed letters from the board. (Board members’ identities are public, so there is no secrecy about who reviews pieces.) Then, if appropriate, someone is assigned to work with the author to coach him or her on how to improve the piece prior to publication.
As Ball described the process, thousands of words are written about submissions, and lengthy discussions take place — all to figure out the best content for the journal. But there are no secret reviewers, and the coaching process allows for a collaborative effort to prepare a final version, not someone guessing about how to handle a “revise and resubmit” letter. —Humanities scholars consider the role of peer review | Inside Higher Ed.
Granting a Student SuperAdminGoddessOMGWhatHaveIDone Network Privileges
Remember Me (#StarTrek #TNG Rewatch, Season Four, Episode 5) Dr. Crusher vs The Universe
14% of Americans [say that they] have changed their mind about an issue because of somethi...
10 questions to help you write better headlines
Donald Trump Is a Broken Man (Assessment by Speechwriter for Reagan and both Bushes)
It's Friday night in July, and I'm jamming with my fall course preps.