The peer-review process is an invaluable aspect of any scientific community. We aim to adopt a peer-review approach that will inspire meaningful dialogue within our community at SFU, and we encourage you to participate in this dialogue by submitting accessible and engaging work for your peers. Below we outline the process by which we review submissions. The initial evaulation and peer review stages are both double-blind reviews with neither authors nor reviewers named.
What is the difference between an editor and a reviewer? Check out the journal team page for details!
1. Initial Evaluation |
2. Peer Review |
3. Publication |
| 1. Section editors make an initial evaluation of papers 2. Papers which do not meet journal policy or standards are politely declined 3. Papers that pass this initial evaluation will be sent back to authors (along with feedback) for initial revision to be re-submitted within two weeks. |
1. Graduate reviewers receive submissions passing initial evaluation 2. Reviewers examine the originality, ethics, and structure of submissions, provide critical comments, and advise to accept, accept with revisions, or reject each article. 3. Feedback is sent to authors and revision requests are sent with a stated re-submission deadline. |
1. Section Editors receive and carefully assess each manuscript review to ensure revisions were addressed. 2. After consensus is reached, selected pieces are published! - The publication will be made available online and in print form (by request). |