Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers serve an important function for TETYC by sharing their expertise and knowledge of the profession of English studies at two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions. Reviewers shape the journal’s scope and focus so that it reflects the needs of readers in both practical and theoretical areas of college English studies.

Please think about your own professional and disciplinary knowledge and your experiences as you review a manuscript for TETYC, as well as how and whether other professionals in the field—your colleagues—will have their needs met as teacher-scholars by the text.

We first ask you to evaluate manuscripts on a Likert-like scale in the following areas: alignment with TETYC’s mission, student focus, application to teaching, scholarly context, audience, presentation, and contribution to the field. This evaluation includes justification of your score, as well as actionable suggestions for revision if needed. We ask that you write directly to the author(s) and offer constructive, actionable commentary discussing these areas so teacher-scholars can develop their work.

TETYC is committed to publishing new voices and supporting teacher-scholars who are beginning innovative programs of research and may be new to the publishing process. Therefore, we ask reviewers to act as peers who are committed to supporting these teacher-scholars’ development through respectful, collegial, and encouraging feedback.

Evaluating Manuscripts

The manuscript evaluation criteria are identified in the following subsections. These criteria are used by both editors and reviewers in reviewing manuscripts and should serve as guidelines for authors considering submission.

Mission

The manuscript aligns with TETYC’s mission and is focused on English studies at two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions:

TETYC publishes articles across the range of English studies related to teaching at two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions. Manuscripts should be grounded in a scholarly context that informs the basis for the discussion about literacy, composition and rhetoric, developmental education, technical and professional communication, community and advocacy writing, literature, creative writing, language, dual and concurrent enrollment, and assessment, as well as professional issues.

Student Focus

The manuscript contributes to our understanding of the specific student population in two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions.

Application to Teaching

The manuscript clearly relates to the teaching and learning of college English studies, including attention to such issues as the institutional and professional conditions that shape teaching in two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions.

Scholarly Context

The manuscript is grounded in a scholarly context that centers current and relevant scholarship from two-year college and access-oriented institution English studies.

Audience

The manuscript addresses issues relevant to English studies teachers in two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions.

Presentation

The structure, writing clarity, tone, tables and figures, and other textual elements contribute to the manuscript’s overall effectiveness.

Contribution to the Field

The manuscript contributes to our understanding of the subject in relation to English studies in two-year colleges and access-oriented institutions.

Manuscript Decision

We ask reviewers to make one of four recommendations: accept, accept conditionally, revise and resubmit, or decline to publish.

Accept

The manuscript should be published with minor revisions or edits.

Accept Conditionally

The manuscript should be published but needs targeted revision to more fully attend to the TETYC publication criteria.

Revise and Resubmit

The manuscript has potential for publication, but the journal reserves judgment pending significant revision based on reviewer and editor review.

Decline to Publish

The manuscript does not appear to be a good fit for the journal or does not successfully meet the manuscript evaluation criteria.