|
Editorial Review Process
Before submitting their papers, authors are encouraged to use the services of a qualified editor and/or proofreader to ensure the professionalism and accuracy of the paper’s writing quality including but not limted to content, style, clear writing, organization and correct language and grammar usage.
Papers are subjected to a blind review by a minimum of three members of the ASC
International Board of
Reviewers. All contributions, whether invited or unsolicited, are critically reviewed.
Manuscripts must demonstrate clear communication and authority of knowledge of the topic
to ensure acceptance. Authors are encouraged to make liberal use of multimedia to visually
present data and ideas.
Reviewers are selected from those having content knowledge
concerning the manuscript's topic. This review process generally takes from eight to ten
weeks. Authors are notified upon receipt and completion of the review process. Once your
manuscript has been accepted you will be notified and given instructions concerning
copyrights.
Submission to the Proceeding implies the manuscript is not being
considered nor has been published elsewhere. Authors are expected to
present their respective paper(s) at the Annual Conference.
Review Board Evaluation
Before evaluation of any paper, the reviewer will consider the
following summary of the ASC goals and objectives, as listed in Article I, Section 2 of
the bylaws. The paper is to be evaluated as to its potential contribution towards the
goals and objectives of the ASC, and the specific topic area of the paper.
Goal of this association is to develop and advance construction
higher education by sharing ideas and knowledge, providing
guidance, and promoting excellence in curricula, teaching, research, and
service.
Objectives:
|
to assist institutions in the establishment, development, and advancement
of construction education programs
|
|
to establish and promote professional and technical ideals, standards and
identity for construction education
|
|
to innovate, improve and adjust curricula, educational and teaching
processes
|
|
to promote the welfare and standing of construction education in other
institutions and related fields
|
|
to encourage, coordinate and participate in research for
construction
|
The reviewer will consider the technical content of the
professional approach to the topic. Please consider the following "review
criteria" when writing your paper.
Organization
|
Content
|
Overall
Quality
|
|
Purpose of the Paper
|
|
Logical Order of Information
|
|
|
Meets the Purpose of the ASC
|
|
New Information or New Approaches to Existing Knowledge
|
|
Technically Correct
|
|
Accuracy/Usage of Technical Terms
|
|
|
Professional Appearance
|
|
Grammar/Sentence Structure
|
|
Clarity of Figures and Tables
|
|
Conclusions/Recommendations
|
|
Protected Access
The Annual Proceedings editor/publisher assigns content
qualified reviewers to each paper from the ASC Reviewer Board membership. Upon receipt,
the paper is posted below. Each group of at least three reviewers and the respected
author(s)
are given a user name and a password for their anonymity and private access to the
paper. Only these individuals (and the editor/publisher) will be able to access the
paper in question.
Discussion Between Author and Reviewers
The reviewer is encouraged to complete the "Reviewer Comments"
section for each paper reviewed. A professional approach is used to make comments. The purpose of the paper review is to supply constructive feedback to the
author(s) and to improve the overall quality of the paper. Authors and reviewers remain
anonymous in this process.
Notification and Acceptance/Denial
Authors are notified of the Proceedings receipt of
their paper as indicated in the review process schedule. Once
the paper has been reviewed, the author(s) is expected to submit a revised paper
that included either the suggested changes or a rebuttal in defense of questioned content. The final
paper will be reviewed by the same panel as the first panel. Verification of acceptance or
denial will be forwarded at the completion of the review process.
|