Research in the Teaching of English
Research in the Teaching of English is the flagship research journal of NCTE.
Guidelines for Reviewers
The editors of Research in the Teaching of English offer these guidelines to assist reviewers in evaluating manuscripts. Thank you to David Slomp (author) and Norbert Elliot (reviewer), who kindly agreed to allow their manuscript and comments to be used in the Example Review sections.
Briefly (in 2-3 sentences) describe your understanding of the author’s/authors’ project.
Does the project “fit” RTE? State whether and why you feel the project is appropriate for RTE, in terms of both quality and fit. To support your claims about the manuscript’s appropriateness for RTE, please provide detailed feedback on the following:
Significance to the Field
Does the manuscript identify a problem and is it a significant one for the field of language and literacy research? What ongoing conversations is it entering into? Is the problem identified, or the approach to the problem that is taken, fresh and timely? Do the findings or conclusions deliver new insights in relation to that problem?
Does the manuscript employ a methodology consistent with the theoretical orientation that informs the investigation and the goals of the manuscript? Does the manuscript clearly describe the research design and relevant methods used so knowledge gained on language and literacy research may be increased? To what extent is the methodological design aligned with the research questions? Does the methodology hold to the highest standards set by other relevant studies?
Analysis & Interpretation
Are the claims insightful? How well are the claims grounded in the evidence? How well is the evidence synthesized into the discussion?
To what extent does the article demonstrate strong scholarly grounding? How well is the theory that grounds the article extended or reconceived as a consequence of the analysis?
Quality of Writing
To what extent is the writing clear, fluent, and engaging?
Offer the authors any advice you may have at this point about how to revise and develop the project. Note its strengths and points of interest; note its weaknesses both major and minor.
Evaluate your comments and recommend a decision. To submit your decision, please log in to Editorial Manager to upload your evaluation and comments and finalize your decision. We kindly ask that you refrain from uploading your review as an attachment. Instead, please copy and paste your comments into the review box. This eases the review process for editors. If you have any difficulty, please email RTE Assistant Editors at firstname.lastname@example.org, as they will be able to assist in pasting your review.
Recommendations to RTE
Reject and Resubmit as New Manuscript
This means you’re recommending the author completely re-write the manuscript and, when resubmitted, the editorial team will send it out to a completely new set of reviewers.
Revise and Resubmit
This means you’re recommending the manuscript undergo major revisions and then be sent out to the same set of reviewers, if possible.
Conditional Accept with Specified Revisions
This means you’re recommending a more minor set of revisions that might warrant one of the reviewers taking another look at the manuscript before it is officially “accepted.”
Accept with Minor Editing
You have successfully reviewed for RTE. On behalf of the editorial team, thank you for your time and contribution.