Does the scholar state the basic purposes of his or her work clearly?
Does the scholar define objectives that are realistic and achievable?
Does the scholar identify important questions in the field?
Does the scholar show an understanding of existing scholarship in the field?
Does the scholar bring the necessary skills to his or her work?
Does the scholar bring together the resources necessary to move the project
Does the scholar use methods appropriate to the goals?
Does the scholar apply effectively the methods selected?
Does the scholar modify procedures in response to changing circumstances?
Does the scholar achieve the goals?
Does the scholar's work add consequentially to the field?
Does the scholar's work open additional areas for further exploration?
Does the scholar use a suitable style and effective organization to
present his or her work? Does the scholar use appropriate forums for
communicating work to its intended audiences?
Does the scholar present his or her message with clarity and integrity?
Does the scholar critically evaluate his or her own work?
Does the scholar bring an appropriate breadth of evidence to his or her critique?
Does the scholar use evaluation to improve the quality of future work?
The review process will be as follows:
Editor sends the Word or Word Perfect version of the submission
(without the name of the author(s)) to three members of the Editorial
2. Review Board members will read the submission and write their comments on
the electronic review form, based upon the Scholarship Assessed rubrics
3. Each Reviewer will include on the review form 2 - 3 comments for the author
of the submission about the content, argumentation, conclusions, etc. If the
submission is selected for possible publication, these comments will be given
to the author for the purpose of the giving the author an option to review
the submission and make potential revisions to strengthen it.
4. Each Reviewer will evaluate the submission according to the following list