Scholar Publishing Academy

 Editor Guidelines

 

I.                 Submission Handling

 

  1. Initial Assignment: Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to a Subject Matter Expert editor based on their expertise and availability. The SME is selected from the editorial board and will serve as the handling editor.
  2. Reviewer Selection: The handling editor selects 2-3 reviewers with relevant expertise, ensuring a diverse range of perspectives and avoiding conflicts of interest (see section V). Reviewers should be selected from the Academy's reviewer pool, supplemented by external experts as needed.
  3. Recommendation Timeline: The handling editor should provide a recommendation to the EIC within:
    • Standard Papers: Four weeks from receiving all reviews.
    • Short Papers/Rapid Communications: Two weeks from receiving all reviews.

Reviewers should provide their reviews within:

    • Standard Papers: Three weeks of receiving the manuscript.
    • Short Papers/Rapid Communications: One week of receiving the manuscript.

The handling editor is encouraged to contact reviewers promptly to remind them of deadlines and address any questions they may have.

 

  1. Review Report Requirements: Reviewers must submit thorough and constructive reviews addressing significance, originality, methodology, clarity, and overall quality. Numerical ratings should be provided on a standardized scale (e.g., 1-5). Qualitative commentary should be detailed and justified. All reviews should be submitted through the Scholar Publishing Academy's online submission system.

 

For more details see the Reviewer Guideline.

 

  1. Recommendation to EIC: The handling editor's recommendation to the EIC should include:
    • A summary of the reviews, highlighting points of consensus and disagreement.
    • A clear statement of whether the manuscript should be accepted, rejected, or revised.
    • Specific and actionable suggestions for revision, if applicable.

 

 

II. Author Interaction

  1. Decision Communication: The EIC informs the authors of the decision. For revised papers, the handling editor works directly with the authors, providing clear feedback and guidance throughout the revision process.
  2. Revision Handling: For manuscripts requiring revisions, the handling editor tracks the author's progress and provides timely feedback. Resubmissions should be assessed against the original criteria and prior feedback. All communications with the authors should be courteous and professional.

 

III. Editorial Decisions

  1. Final Decision: The EIC has the final say on all editorial decisions. The EIC will consider the handling editor's recommendation and the review reports but retains the authority to overturn the handling editor's recommendation, providing clear justification.
  2. Appeals Process: Authors can appeal the decision by submitting a formal appeal with specific justification within two weeks of the decision. The EIC will review the appeal and communicate a final decision.

 

IV. Record Keeping

The handling editor is responsible for maintaining thorough records of all communications, review reports, and decisions related to the manuscript. These records should be kept within the Scholar Publishing Academy's submission system.

 

V. Conflict of Interest

  1. Disclosure: Handling editors and reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional relationships with authors, or with other reviewers).
  2. Recusal: If a conflict of interest is identified, the handling editor or reviewer must recuse themselves, and the EIC will ensure an appropriate replacement is found.

 

VI. Manuscript Formatting and Submission

Authors are required to submit manuscripts in accordance with the Academy's detailed formatting guidelines, available on our website. Acceptable file formats will be specified in the author guidelines.

VII. Additional Resources

The Academy provides online resources and training to support editors. These resources include: a comprehensive style guide, reviewer training modules, and access to expert consultation. Regular editorial meetings provide opportunities for professional development and collaboration.

This detailed guideline aims to streamline the editorial process, ensuring fairness, consistency, and efficiency within the Scholar Publishing Academy. Regular review and updates of these guidelines are planned.