UCDA : connecting, inspiring, and supporting a creative community in education
page header

UCDA Journal: Design Education

Reviewer Selection

 

As a peer-reviewer for the UCDA Journal, you are contributing to the scholarly growth of your peers and ensuring the publication of high-quality research. Service to your peers contributes the benefits of your invaluable expertise to the design research community. 

 

Reviewers should exhibit expertise in specific areas of design. 

 

Must be willing to:

  • Provide written, unbiased, constructive feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and value of the work
  • Indicate whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rate the work’s composition, accuracy, originality, and interest 
  • Avoid personal comments or criticism
  • Maintain the confidentiality of the review process

 

To become a reviewer, please submit CV and letter of interest. 

[Create a form]

 

Editor/Journal Advisory Board should:

  • Aim to have diversity within the reviewer pool
  • Carefully choose reviewers whose expertise closely matches the submission’s topic
  • Exclude reviewers from the same department or institution as that of the author/s

 

 

-----

 

Peer Review UCDA Journal Submission Guidelines:

 

The UCDA Journal invites submissions that heighten and expand the understanding and practice of design and design education in the past, present, or future.

 

Submissions to UCDA Journal must not have been previously published in print or online.

 

The preferred method of submission is by upload form.

 

A Submission File should include: 

  • A Microsoft Word ONLY, double-spaced typed manuscript set in 12 point Times New Roman with 1” margins, containing a maximum of 5,000 words (not including footnotes and captions), and images embedded within text, captioned and appropriately placed; 
  • A cover page/s containing the following for each author named: 
      • Name*
      • Title*
      • Current affiliation*
      • Mailing address
      • Email address*
      • Phone number
      • A biographical statement of 50–100 words
  • A 250-word abstract of the article*+ Title of article and up to 10 keywords
  • The body of the manuscript
  • An illustration list (captions) with a maximum of 20 figures. Please note that each individual image file counts as one figure. Each caption must contain a title or brief description of the image including a credit line of the rights-holder.
  • A separate .zip Image File containing web-resolution (72 dpi) numbered images (only jpeg, or png). NOTE: Authors will be required to obtain and provide permissions to reprint any images, etc., for which they do not hold rights and should ensure the permissions will be obtainable if/when publication occurs.

 

Manuscript Text Format

The style of manuscripts should conform to the Chicago Manual Style, 17th edition 

 

PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

Reviews are Double-Blind. Identities of the reviewer and author are concealed from each other. Double-blind reviews are considered of high-quality for tenure and promotion committees

 

The Criteria for Peer Review

All manuscripts received by the UCDA Journal will first go before the Design Education Committee (DEC). In reviewing manuscripts, the DEC will consider two sets of criteria for a manuscript to be accepted for peer-review:

 

Submission criteria

  • Does the manuscript fall within the editorial scope of UCDA Journal?
  • Does the manuscript follow submission guidelines?

 

Quality criteria

  • The originality of the manuscript’s position
  • The clarity and completeness of the stated position (e.g., does the author/s provide support from relevant literature?)
  • The accessibility of the manuscript’s writing style

 

Phase One – Desk Review

The UCDA Design Education Committee initially reviews submissions and decides the following:

  • If the manuscript does not meet submission criteria (see above), it will receive no further consideration and be declined.
  • If the manuscript does not meet the submission criteria (for example, it exceeds the maximum word limit or does not meet the citation style) but has merits, the author[s] may be extended an opportunity to make revisions before final consideration.
  • If the manuscript does not meet the quality criteria, it will be declined.
  • If the manuscript meets the quality criteria, it will be sent out to peer reviewers for their assessment.

 

Phase Two – Peer Review

  • The Editorial Board reviews the DEC decisions and forwards selected manuscripts to 2 peer reviewers as a double-blind review.
  • Peer reviewers utilize a rubric to assist with assessment of the manuscript
  • Once the manuscript has been received by the reviews it is considered “under peer review”.
  • Reviewers have XXX weeks to review and return their assessment.

 

Phase Three – Outcome and Response

  • The Editorial Board reviews the peer-review assessments and determines the following outcomes:
    • Publish as is
    • Publish with minor/major revisions
    • Revise & Resubmit
    • Decline
  • In the case of publish with minor/major revisions or revise and resubmit, the Editorial Board will provide guidance that could include a summary of review assessment or the review assessment in full. 

 

Phase Four – Final Publication Decision

  • The Editorial Board reviews the final submitted manuscripts and determines the following outcomes:
    • Publish
    • Decline
  • If the Editorial Board ultimately decides to decline a manuscript, it will provide a sufficient explanation for its decision. The Editorial Board’s decision is final and there is no process for appeal.

 

-----

 

Pre-Review Rubric

Evaluated with Yes/No

  • The work meets submission guidelines.
  • The work is significant to the field/discipline (the contributions relate to practice, theory, methodology, pedagogy, history, etc.)
  • The title is concise, descriptive, and appropriate for the topic and venue.
  • The project/topic fits within the scope of the UCDA Journal and/or is appropriate for its readers.
  • The topic is clearly defined and presented.
  • The keywords/keyword phrases are concise, descriptive, appropriate for the topic, and venue.
  • The manuscript’s position appears to be original
  • Literature/media reviews are provided to give context within the field/discipline.
  • The manuscript’s writing style is accessible and appropriate for the UCDA Journal 

Review Rubric

  • The work is significant to the field/discipline (the contributions relate to practice, theory, methodology, pedagogy, history, etc.)
  • The thesis is original or unique, it clearly builds on the work of other researchers, and/or it furthers existing ideas or theories (rather than repeating established concepts).
  • The approach or methodology of the research is valid.
  • The conclusions are drawn from the results of the research and the assessment of the author’s outcomes is rigorous and valid.
  • The citations and referencing styles are correct 
  • An introduction and conclusion are included and evaluated
  • The writing has proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling