eJournal
Virtual Visit Request info Apply
MENUMENU
  • 2024 Articles
    • Spring 2024
  • 2022 Articles
    • Fall 2022
    • Spring 2022
  • 2021 Articles
    • Fall 2021
  • 2020 Articles
    • Fall 2020
    • Spring 2020
  • 2019 Articles
    • Fall 2019
    • Spring 2019
  • 2018 Articles
    • Fall 2018
    • Spring 2018
  • Archive
  • Contributing
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Reviewers
  • IN
  • eJournal
  • JEP Reviewers

Editors

Editor Dr. Rose Ylimaki Associate Editor Dr. Mary Dereshiwsky Associate Editor Dr. Frank Davidson

JEP reviewers

How to become a reviewer

To become a reviewer, submit a curriculum vitae and a notice of intent to Dr. Rose Ylimaki.

Reviewer instructions

Good peer reviewers play a crucial part in the advancement of a profession. The essential goal of the blind peer review process is to maximize the quality of published research in a field of scholarly inquiry. A reviewer has obligations to three audiences:

The editors of the journal Accordion Closed

The editors of the journal rely on reviewers to be thorough, prompt, and fair.  The editors expect to be provided with:
  • detailed but concise assessments of manuscript quality,
  • a clear recommendation about whether the paper should be rejected, revised, or accepted, and
  • feedback to authors that will be helpful in crafting a revision (or submission to another journal).

The author(s) of the paper Accordion Closed

The authors rely on reviewers to be constructive, reasoned, explicit, and ethical.  A submitted manuscript is confidential; do not discuss, copy, or quote it.  Identify both the strengths and the weaknesses of the paper.  When serving as a reviewer, be aware of your biases or preferences.  Do not be superficial or dismissive.  Consider how you can help the author(s) to improve their study.

Scholars and practitioners in the profession Accordion Closed

We hope to serve as a valuable resource for educational leaders, teachers, policymakers, scholars, and graduate students by shedding light on the practical implications of policy decisions and their implementation.

Reviewers

  • Stacey Berklan
  • Karyn Blair
  • Gayle Blanchard
  • Howard Carlson
  • Kwang-Lee Chu
  • Nicholas Clement
  • Sarah Collins
  • Ali Conant
  • Walter Delecki
  • Mary Dereshiwsky
  • Walter Delecki
  • Mary Dereshiwsky
  • Robyn Conrad Hansen
  • Randy Hendricks
  • Barbara Hickman
  • Tom Hughes
  • Steve Jeras
  • Sue Kater
  • Renea Kennedy
  • Renea Kennedy
  • Stephen Lawton
  • Joseph Martin
  • Gretchen McAllister
  • Amy McCarthy
  • Anders Olofsson
  • Anthony Osborn
  • Gabriela Ramos
  • Emily Schlittenhart
  • Michael Schwanenberger
  • Marisel Schweitzer
  • Laura Sujo de Montes
  • Aimee Sulit
  • Gary L. Thrift
  • Kris Treat
  • Chih-Hsiung Tu