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.
Leftovers from the food my colleagues brought in to bribe/reward those few students who sh...
MLA In-text citations: Writing that got you through high school won’t do in college.
Duke stops assigning numeric values to essays, test scores
No focus, no fights, and a bad back – 16 ways technology has ruined my life
Nor the Battle to the Strong #StarTrek #DS9 Rewatch (Season 5, Episode 4) Jake Sisko, cub ...
I Don’t Know Why Everyone’s in Denial About College Students Who Can’t Do the Reading