TuftScope employs a rigorous review process for all papers, commentaries, and other submissions to the journal. All papers undergo a multitier review process:
I. Peer Review
➢ Articles are assembled and reviewed and placed into appropriate categories. Articles are divided among the review staff. The review process is standardized and employs a rubric and quality assessment system. Faculty board members provide secondary comments and reviews.
II. Selection Process
➢ Editors meet for a second time to review articles, with presentations by editors of their assigned articles. Faculty suggestions are assessed alongside with the editor’s review. The Editorial Board then votes on a subset of articles for final review based upon the assessment of faculty, editors, and the Editorial Board.
III. Final Decisions
➢ Generally papers that reach the final review will be published in the journal. Papers are edited individually by editors for style, grammar, and length. Submissions are standardized into the_TuftScope_ publication format.
➢ Some papers selected for final review are not published in the current print issue due to a variety of reasons, including
TuftScope maintains the confidentiality of all editorial assessments and decisions. As of 2009 TuftScope has implemented a double-blind review process. The selection process for all submissions is “free from discrimination based upon gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnic group, or national origin in accordance with the non-discrimination policy of Tufts University. The Editorial Board believes in providing the undergraduate community with a quality academic publication that is published and reviewed via a fair, rigorous, and efficient process.
In order to provide the best review process possible, considerable time is spent on evaluating and considering papers for publication. In the end, the Editorial Board selects papers both for the quality of the arguments made, as well as for article’s contribution to the TuftScope mission of the interdisciplinary study of health, ethics, and policy. The Editorial Board wishes you the best in the selection process and hopes to read your submission soon.
* The Editorial Board reserves the right to changes policies described within this discussion for its Review Process. All aspects of the review process are not detailed in this discussion. The Board does not provide statistics regarding the number of submissions received or the nature of the submissions.
See Submission Guidelines
Time: 9:00PM, Mondays
Location: Eaton 204