Review Process

JCSHESA is committed to providing timely and relevant scholarship. Additionally, JCSHESA believes that the writing process should be developmental, professional, open, and undertaken with an ethic of care. As such, the journal undertakes an open-review, peer-review process and requires all reviewers to agree to an Ethics of Care and Practice. Please review this document in its entirety to ensure your manuscript is reviewed appropriately.

What is an open peer review?

There will be an Associate Editor and three reviewers assigned to each manuscript. During an open review process all papers will be uploaded to a secure third-party site that allows reviewers to provide feedback and critique manuscripts while the authors simultaneously respond (similar to Google Documents).

  1. If participating as an open submitter (as opposed to an anonymous submitter), authors will also have the opportunity to provide real-time feedback to the reviewers allowing for timely discussion. This process allows the journal to shorten the time to publication by reducing the feedback timeline and it allows authors to discuss their editorial choices. See both option descriptions under the Review Process section on this page.
  2. In addition to the three Editorial Board Reviewers, all other Editorial Board members will have access to each manuscript and the option to provide feedback during the First Review Process. They may provide feedback, but will not recommend a final decision on manuscripts. The three assigned editors and the Associate Editor will recommend final decisions.
  3. The first round of review is open to the three assigned Editorial Board Reviewers, authors, and the entire Editorial Board.
  4. The second round of review is open only to the three assigned Editorial Board reviewers (closed-review).

Review Process

Authors have two submission options:

  1. Anonymous submitting- If submitting anonymously, the author’s information and other identifying markers (e.g., title page, institutional affiliations, in-text citations) must be removed from the manuscript. If authors choose this option they will still be informed of their paper’s reviewers, but the reviewers will have no knowledge of the author. All authors who are formally affiliated with JCSHESA must submit using this option. Authors will not be able to discuss their feedback in real-time during the review process.
  2. Open submitting- If open submitting, the authors may keep all identifying markers in their manuscript. If authors choose this option, all author and reviewer information is available. Both reviewer and author will have the opportunity to discuss feedback regarding their paper in real-time during the review process.


JCSHESA strives to provide timely and relevant scholarship; therefore, the timeline to publication is shorter than most journals. While the journal hopes to maintain the integrity of this timeline, this will not always be the case. If the timeline requires modification, the Associate Editor assigned to an article will be in contact with the authors. This timeline starts from the point of submission. All reviewers commit to adhering to this timeline.

  • Manuscript assigned to Associate Editor (1 month)
  • First-round open review begins (3 weeks)
  • Determine required revisions and communication to author(s) (1 week)
  • Author revisions and resubmissions (3 weeks)
  • Formatting and notifying reviewers (1 week)
  • Second-round closed review begins (2 weeks)
  • Additional requested revisions from author(s) and submission of Research in Brief and Communicative Media (3 weeks)
  • Copyediting (2 weeks)

Ethics of Care and Practice

The Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs requires all of its editorial board and reviewers to adhere to an ethic of care and practice. By adhering to this document, editors and reviewers promise authors developmental feedback, professionalism, and open communication. Below are the guidelines that JCHESA adheres to:

  1. Reviewers should use collegial tone by writing in first or second person to convey personal care in providing feedback.
  2. Reviewers should approach manuscripts as coaches, offering specific and detailed information regarding issues for improvement.
  3. In pointing out areas of weakness, reviewers should offer constructive ways of addressing issues.
  4. Reviewers can offer suggestions when appropriate. However, reviewers should refrain from re-writing the paper or offering advice that would compromise the core of the manuscript.
  5. Every review should start by conveying the central idea and key contribution in the paper. By demonstrating a clear and enthusiastic summation of the paper’s essence, it shows care for the writer and their ideas.
  6. The introduction should convey an understanding of the core message and point of view derived from the manuscript, summarize strengths and areas of improvement, and foreshadow key actions authors should consider in revision.
  7. Even if a manuscript has significant issues and may ultimately be rejected, reviewers should demonstrate appreciation for the core of the manuscript in hopes to encourage writers to submit to the journal in the future.
  8. Reviewers should offer well-organized feedback.
  9. Reviewers should refer to specific page numbers or line numbers.
  10. Reviewers should not offer opinion on the likeliness of publication except when assigned to do so.
  11. Reviewers should commit and follow through with all deadlines.


Alex Lange, Michigan State University
Allison Mattheis, California State University - Los Angeles
Amy Weatherford, Loyola University Chicago
Brian Reece, University of Oregon
Briellen Griffin, Loyola University Chicago
Briyana Davis, Global Kids
Cynthia Gordon da Cruz, Saint Mary's College California
Daniel Tillapaugh, University of Maine
Evette Allen, Utah State University
Heather M. Wilhelm-Routenberg, Incite Change
Jamison Miller, College of William & Mary
Janice Hicks, University of North Texas
Jarvis McCowin, University of Iowa
Jasmina Camo-Biogradlija, Eastern Michigan University
Jennifer Bosco, University of San Francisco
Jennifer Massey, Baylor University
Jessica Harris, Indiana University
Kate Kedley, University of Iowa
Katherine Aquino, Seton Hall University
Kelly T. Winters, University of Minnesota
Kevin McClure, University of North Carolina-Wilmington
Kira Pasquesi, University of Iowa
Laura Smithers, University of Oregon
Leslie Davis, Colorado State University
Magdalini Grigoriadou, Polytechnic University of Madrid
Maryann Krikorian, Chapman University/Loyola Marymount
Michael Denton, University of South Florida
Mo Xue, University of Alabama
Regina Lowery, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Roy Chan, Boston College
Ryan Hudes, Seton Hall University
Sharon Stein, University of British Columbia
Talea Drummer, Kent State University
Z Nicolazzo, Miami University of Ohio
Pietro Sasso, Monmouth University
Cassandra Mendez, California State University - East Bay
Aaron Morrison, Nebraska Wesleyan University
Amanda Armstrong, College of William and Mary
Amanda Espenschied-Reilly, Aultman College
Amber Hroch, University of California - Los Angeles
Anabelle Estera, Michigan State University
Antonio Duran, Miami University of Ohio
Arthur Sikora, University of Virginia
Brittany Williams, University of Georgia
Chris Linder, University of Georgia
Chris Venable, Kent State University
Derria Byrd, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Dian Squire, University of Denver
Dolly Nguyen, University of California - Los Angeles
Dustin Gee, Harvard University
Dustin Rollins, University of Florida
Ebony Pope, University of Oklahoma
Erich Pritcher, Michigan State University
Erik Sorensen, Miami University of Ohio
J. Mark Pousson, St. Louis University
Jeff Kenney, Clemson University
Jeffrey Pellegrino, Kent State University
Kathryn Bethea, University of Pittsburgh
Lauren Jordan, New York University
Liza Talusan, University of Massachusetts - Boston
Luis Leyva, Rutgers University
Melvin Whitehead, Joliet Junior College
Meseret Hailu, University of Denver
Rebecca Goodmanson, Loyola University Chicago
Ryan Miller, University of Texas - Austin
Stefani Thachik, Virginia Commonwealth University
Taylor Odle, Vanderbilt University
Vu Tran, The Ohio State University
Wilson Okello, Miami University of Ohio