<Research Institute of Curriculum & Instruction (RICI) Article Review Guidelines>

 

Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for all matters required during receipt, review, and selection of articles for publication in the journal of the Research Institute of Curriculum & Instruction(RICI).

 

Article 2 (Supervision) All matters concerning publication of the journal, such as receipt of manuscript applications, appointment of reviewers, and presentation of article review results, are supervised by the editorial board. The main contents are as follows:

1. Judgment of review suitability for submitted articles

2. Selection of article reviewers and requesting review

3. Determination of whether to publish revised articles

4. Editing for articles confirmed for publication

5. Other matters concerning article editing

 

Article 3 (Receipt of applications) Only manuscripts that comply with the manuscript guidelines are received; those not meeting the guidelines are returned.

 

Article 4 (Standards) Submitted manuscripts are evaluated based on a specific review format, including consideration of the following:

1. Transparency of research topic

2. Originality of research content

3. Comprehension of previous studies

4. Suitability of research methods

5. Clarity of content expression, such as sentences, tables, and figures

6. Validity of results and conclusions

7. Academic contribution

 

Article 5 (Procedures)

1. Reviews are conducted whenever articles are submitted.

2. For fairness, article authors are kept anonymous.

3. Specialized editors are selected based on the content of the submitted manuscripts. Reviewers able to review the content of the articles based on expertise are nominated, and three reviewers are ultimately appointed for review. In the case of articles submitted by the editorial board members, another editorial board member appoints the reviewers.

4. Reviewers affiliated with the same organization as the author are excluded from reviewer selection.

5. Reviewers must complete their review and submit the results within 10 days of their appointment. If their written reviews are not submitted within the deadline, they may be dismissed from the review process.

 

Article 6 (Judgment of review results)

1. Review results are determined by combining the results from each of the three reviewers.

2. The results are categorized as “accept,” “accept with revision,” “revise and resubmit,” or “reject.” The result and reviewers’ comments are delivered to the authors.

3. Manuscripts categorized “accept” are accepted for publication without revision, although the editorial board may request revision when it is deemed necessary, or if issues undiscovered by the reviewers emerge.

4. Manuscripts categorized “accept with revision” are subject to examination by the editorial board to determine their suitability for publication after revision are completed.

5. Manuscripts categorized “revise and resubmit” undergo re-review after revision and resubmission by the authors based on the reviewers’ comments.

6. If the authors fail to submit revised manuscripts by the deadline, it is assumed that they have given up on the review process.

7. If the reviewers provide inconsistent results, decisions are made by majority. If it is difficult to make the judgment, a subcommittee consisting of editors from the editorial board in each area of expertise is organized to make decisions.

8. Authors of articles that are accepted must submit the Pledge of Compliance with Research Ethics.

9. The method for judging review results is as follows:

Review results				Judgment
	Reviewer 1	Reviewer 2	Reviewer 3
1	accept	accept	accept	accept
2	accept / accept with revision	accept / accept with revision	accept with revision	accept with revision
3	accept / accept with revision	accept / accept with revision	revise and resubmit	accept with revision
4	accept / accept with revision	accept / accept with revision	reject	accept with revision
5	accept / accept with revision	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit
6	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit
7	accept / accept with revision	revise and resubmit	reject	revise and resubmit
8	revise and resubmit	revise and resubmit	reject	reject
9	accept / accept with revision	reject	reject	reject
10	revise and resubmit	reject	reject	reject
11	reject	reject	reject	reject

10. (Appeal) The authors may file a written objection to the editorial board's final judging results. The editorial board may review the objection of the authors and re-examine it by appointing new reviewers.

 

Article 7 (Copyright) The following regulations apply to authors of articles that are accepted.

1. If there are two or more authors for a submitted article, they shall be provided in order of first author and co-authors.

2. The “corresponding author” refers to the author responsible for the entire process of article submission, and determines the order of authors. When making revisions to the article, the corresponding author must notify the co-authors to obtain approval. The corresponding author must be specified in the article.

 

Article 9 (Confidentiality of review content) Editors and reviewers must not disclose any content obtained in the process of article review and editing.

 

Article 10 (Other decisions) Matters other than the those specified in these guidelines shall be determined by the decision of the editorial board.

 

Additional Clauses

1. These guidelines shall take effect on November 2, 1997.
2. These guidelines shall take effect on August 1, 2002.
3. These guidelines shall take effect on March 1, 2006.
4. These guidelines shall take effect on September 1, 2007.
5. These guidelines shall take effect on March 1, 2008.
6. These guidelines shall take effect on July 1, 2009.
6. These guidelines shall take effect on January 1, 2012.
8. These guidelines shall take effect on February 1, 2016.
9. These guidelines shall take effect on July 1, 2016.
10. These guidelines shall take effect on February 25, 2019.