Editorial: School Science and Mathematics 101

School Science and Mathematics, May 2002 by Flick, Lawrence B, Lederman, Norman G

Approximately 30% of submitted manuscripts are delayed immediately upon receipt because they do not comply with our submission guidelines or do not follow APA style. Common problems include no abstract, no running head, no page numbers, tables/figures in wrong location, identifying information within the text such as author names and affiliations, and single spaced text instead of double spaced text. When manuscripts with problems are received, a letter is immediately sent back to the primary author outlining the items that must be corrected before the manuscript can begin the review process.

Assigning Reviewers

Reviewers are vital to our journal. Their discriminating reviews help us meet our goal of publishing research-oriented articles and theoretical articles with implications for research to improve the quality of math and science education. A list of current reviewers is included in the back of this issue. Anyone wishing to become a reviewer should write the co-editors at the address listed on the inside front cover or submit the reviewer application form available from the journal web site (http://osu.orst.edu/Dept/sci_mth_education/SSM/).

The managing editor assigns three reviewers to each manuscript, based upon its substantive focus. A "blind" review process is used. If the manuscript focus is mathematics, all three reviewers are individuals with an identified expertise in mathematics or mathematics education. If the manuscript focuses on science, all three reviewers are scientists or science educators. Manuscripts with an integration focus are reviewed by a combination of mathematics and science reviewers. Every attempt is made to provide reviewers with manuscripts most closely aligned with their respective topics ofprofessional interest. Within about one week after being received at our editorial office, manuscripts are sent to reviewers, along with a reviewer feedback form. Reviewers are urged to complete their reviews within 1 month. At present, reviewers have been taking an average of 5 weeks to complete their reviews.

The Review Process

Keeping in mind the guidelines specified on the Reviewer Form, each reviewer completes a detailed review of the strengths and weaknesses of each manuscript. These strengths and weaknesses, along with a recommendation concerning publication, are communicated in writing to the journal co-editors. As reviews are received by the editorial office, the managing editor enters the information into the database. Authors can track the status of their manuscripts during the review process by either calling the editorial office or logging on to the journal web site. Presently, the journal website only indicates if the manuscript has completed the review process and a decision has been made (accept/reject).

Manuscripts receiving unanimous "accept" or "reject" reviews are sent directly to the co-editors, who render a final decision based upon the reviews. For approximately 60% of the manuscripts we receive, reviews are not unanimous. In the case of a split decision, the manuscript and its accompanying reviews are sent to one of our associate editors for an internal review. The associate editor reviews the manuscript, considers the three other reviews, and makes a recommendation to the co-editors. After all reviews have been completed, the manuscripts and reviews are sent to one of the co-editors. If the internal review sides with the majority (either accept or reject), that disposition is ultimately followed. If the internal review creates a tie, one of the co-editors reads the manuscript and renders an editorial decision.