Become Academic Exchange Reviewer
  • evaluate the literature that describes academic culture and academic accomplishments
  • contribute to the professional development of another educator
  • make a connection and influence the quality of teaching and learning
  • to apply send e-mail to: aequarterly@gmail.com
  • you will be asked to do two sample reviews of articles supplied by AEQ
  • for reviewing rules see RATING TABLE and Manuscript Reviewing Guidelines
  • AEQ accepts author submissions in two ways: ELECTRONIC or PAPER.
ELECTRONIC
See listing of available manuscripts. Request submission by number from academicexchange2@yahoo.com Return to the same address in about two weeks. E-mail will be our way to communicate with you. 		or PAPER
This option is used rarely. See listing of available manuscripts. Look for submissions identified by initials "pm" in the submission number. Request by number from    academicexchange2@yahoo.com or Academic Exchange Quarterly, P.O. Box 131 Stuyvesant Falls, NY 12174    Return to the above postal address in about four weeks. Postal mail will be our way to communicate with you. 
 Requesting  submission for review 
-- See listing of available submissions in  TRACK-YOUR-SUBMISSION  Each entry is divided into ten segments/columns.
-- Submission is available for review when
	-- 5th column (pg) has number 09 or 10 or 11
	-- AND at least one column 2nd or 3rd or 4th has no letter or number e.g. ( 0 - r )
-- Submission is NOT available for review wwhen
	-- number 09 or 10 or 11 is missing  ( - - )  in 5th column  
	-- 2nd and 3rd and 4th column have numbers or letters like ( o  0  R )
-- For additional explanation of ten segmennts/columns, see 1st  2nd-4th  5th  6th  7th  8th  9th  10th
  • Academic Exchange Quarterly adheres to a policy of double-blind peer reviews of all articles submitted for publication. Hence, identity of the author is hidden from the reviewer and identity of the reviewer is hidden from the author. Plus, identity of one reviewer is never revealed to another reviewer. Two examples of assuring anonymity.
    • We would like you to establish a 3-letter identity for yourself which becomes part of manuscript submission number. However, since a discerning author could easily relate one’s initials to the corresponding name, we urge you to choose a 3-letter identity that does not correspond to your initials. To get proper credit, sign your reviews with so chosen initials.
    • This example will depend on the PC-based version of Microsoft Word that you are using:
      -- remove your name from "the user informattion tab"
      -- for newer versions, go to the “Edit” mennu and slide down to “preferences”
      -- for older versions, go to the “Tools” meenu then select "options"
      -- click on the user information tab
      -- you should see your name or your instituution's, etc
      -- change the user ID to "reviewer" or "annonymous"
      -- enter a letter for the initial
      -- click "ok," that will show up in the traacking.
      You can always change it back to your own name for other tasks and this may be a bit easier than having to have someone change your registry.
    • Windows XP
  • To ensure quality of reviews and uniformity among reviewers, the journal asks each reviewer to make appropriate comments within the body of an article and to respond to the Rating Table guidelines at the end of each article. There are two ways to review: ELECTRONIC or PAPER.
    • ELECTRONIC     With the tracking on, you will review and revise the manuscript. Pressing the delete key or backspace key will preserve the integrity of the author’s original text while allowing you to draw lines through it as you believe is appropriate. Any text or comment that you add will appear in a different color and will thus be clearly distinguished from the author’s text. If you wish to add notes or write questions on the manuscript (the equivalent of writing in the margins), AEQ suggests that you start and end the comment with three asterisks. Example: *** More detail required here, please expand this section ***.
      If the above is not clear, try the following:
      1. Open up the submission, which will be in MS word format.
      2. Click on "Tools"
      3. Click on "Track Changes"
      4. Click on "Highlight Changes"
      5. Click on the box which says, "track changes while editing"
      6. Click also on the other boxes which say, "highlight changes on screen" and "highlight changes in printed document" if they are not already checked
      7. Click on "Okay"
      8. Then any changes, corrections, or comments you wish to embed in the text of the submission will be in color, e.g. red
      9. If the color does not come through, then go back to the box which says, "track changes while editing." Click on "Options." Make sure the color is one you prefer.
    • PAPER     No need to use a computer; instead use a pen for corrections. Use bright ink (red, blue, green, purple, etc.) not black ink or pencil. Write legibly or print. Don't make a correction by writing over a character. Instead, strike through the incorrect character or word and write the correct one directly above it or in the margin close to the relevant strike. Use only one side of the paper. 

RATING TABLE   Scoring from 1 to 5: 
1=strongly agree, 2=agree, 3=disagree, 4=strongly disagree, 5=n/a - not applicable

Submission Number  ........................
Submission title  .....................................................

A:  Manuscript deals with a significant problem/issue --  
B:  Abstract and/or Introduction  state paper's purpose, paper's thesis -- 
C:  Author included  appropriate background or literature review -- 
D:  Author's writing style is academic and clear * -- 
E:  Study is conceptually based and theoretically grounded --  
F:  Analyses are sound and appropriate --  
G:  Conclusion flows logically from the study --  
H:  Readers of AEQ will find this article  of interest --  

Reviewer’s comments and recommendations .................................
Reviewer's  3-letter identity  .............
Manuscript Reviewing Guidelines
Reviewing manuscripts is an important yet unheralded job. Since all reviews are "blind," the author will not know whom to thank for the time and suggestions offered. The readers and consumers of published articles will not cite the reviewer nor thank him/her when a published article is helpful. In short, reviewing appears to be a thankless job. However, reviewers are intrinsically motivated and rewarded. They accept the importance of the duty and the significance of evaluating the literature that describes our culture and our accomplishments.
  1. All work is voluntary. No formal compensation is given. However, we do offer five incentive remuneration options.
  2. You must have PhD or EdD or show other competency...
  3. Tips and Guidelines for Reviewers
  4. See four samples of Unacceptable Review (no credit given)   and   Acceptable Review (credit given)
    Unacceptable           one              Acceptable
    Unacceptable           two              Acceptable
    Unacceptable           three           Acceptable
    Unacceptable           four             Acceptable
  5. No credit will be given for late reviews or one void of Rating Table and/or author helpful suggestions and comments. For example, the following flat statements, on its own, are not author helpful
    • The paper identifies a problem but does not address solutions adequately.
    • I am not sure this paper adds much to the literature.
    • Poorly written.
    Also, no credit will be given when two other reviewers contradict one reviewer's flat statement similar to these...
    • It is well written.
    • A knowledgeable article.
    • This paper is an interesting account of the subject.
    • I recommend to publish it as it is.
  6. You are not required to do any review sent to you, requested or not. Just return it "not interested." However, when you request yourself and we record on track-your-submission, authors expect you to complete it within 3 weeks. See, sample feedback from authors
  7. Editors, whose ranking is based solely on the number of reviews, ought to complete the following minimum number of reviews annually:
    • Consulting Editor: 12 reviews
    • Assistant Editor: 24 reviews
    This averages to 1-2 proper reviews each month. Failure to keep up with said average will result in a warning and a second instance shall result in demotion to a lower editorial rank or dismissal from the journal staff.
  8. You are eligible for AEQ Editor's letter of recommendation when you are evaluated for promotion, tenure or post-tenure review of tenured faculty at your college/university.
  9. Names of all new Reviewers are listed in Academic Exchange Quarterly print edition and AEQ webpage after one year of positive contribution to the journal - at least twelve reviews .
  10. Thanks for selecting Academic Exchange Quarterly for your professional needs.
March 2009