NASPA Journal-Guidelines for Manuscript Preparation

Purpose:

Research articles for the NASPA Journal should stress the underlying issues or problems that stimulated the research; treat the methodology concisely; and, most importantly, offer a full discussion of results, implications, and conclusions. In the belief that NASPA Journal members have much to learn from one another, we encourage the submission of thoughtful, documented essays or historical perspectives.

Please contact the Editor directly for more information at .

Language:

Procedure:

1. Prepare the manuscript, including page numbers, in accordance with the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), Fifth Edition.
2. All NASPA Journal submissions must use the online submission process. NASPA members and non-members can access the article submission process by selecting Publications, then NASPA Journal, then Submit an Article from the NASPA home page (www.naspa.org).
3. Double-space all portions of the manuscript, including references, tables, figures, and quotations. All figures must be drawn in black ink on white paper or submitted as an EPS or uncompressed Tiff (600dpi) file.
4. Avoid biased terminology (see pp. 61-76 of the APA publication manual).
5. Do not use footnotes; incorporate all information into the text.
6. Use the APA reference style, listing only references cited in the text.
7. Use the active voice to the largest extent possible.
8. Use verb tense appropriately: past tense for the literature review and description of procedures, and present tense for the results and discussion.
9. Proofread and double-check the references before submitting the manuscript.
10. Submit only manuscripts not under consideration by other journals.

Editorial Review Process

1. Upon receipt of the manuscript, the editorial assistant completes a brief review of the manuscript to ensure that it meets length requirements, that there is no information that identifies the authors, and that it has met other minimum requirements for submission.
2. The NASPA Journal’s online manuscript processing system (the “BePress” system) assigns a unique number to the manuscript to assist in the blind review process. This four-digit number is called the “tracking number.”
3. The editorial assistant sends an acknowledgement e-mail to the primary author to confirm the manuscript’s receipt and to inform the author about the review process. This is sent via e-mail, which is consistent with the online review process.
4. The editorial assistant sends blind copies of the manuscript to three reviewers whose areas of interest and expertise most closely match the manuscript’s focus. The manuscript review request is sent via e-mail; reviewers access the manuscript through the online system. The NASPA Journal normally expects the review to be completed within five weeks.
5. Reviewers should carefully consider the following points when reviewing each manuscript:
   • Topic: Is the topic appropriate for the NASPA Journal? Is it timely?
   • Level: Do authors address the concerns, interests, and needs of the student affairs generalist who has broad responsibility for educational leadership, policy, staff development, and management? Does this article contribute to the current body of knowledge and the profession?
   • Implications: Do authors demonstrate how their research might be relevant for student affairs faculty and/or practitioners? Do they succeed in connecting their findings to larger areas of concern for the student affairs generalist, such as their potential impact on policy decisions or practice?
   • Title: Is the title interesting and appropriate? Is it suitable for a journal article submission?
   • Flow: Is the introduction appropriate and clear? Are the content and study presented in a reasonable manner? Are the conclusions compelling and well supported?
   • Grammar: Are the voice and tense consistent throughout the manuscript? Is there an overuse of key words? Are there misspellings? Is there excessive jargon? Is there language that could be construed as prejudiced, biased or disrespectful?
   • Abbreviations: Are abbreviations overused? Are they clearly understood?
   • Methodology: Is the methodology accurate and appropriate given the focus of the study? Are statistics presented in a useful way?
   • References: Do references follow the APA Publication Manual (5th ed.)? Are all references that are listed used within the text of the manuscript? Are all used references cited? Are references complete and accurate?
   • Tables: Are tables necessary? Are they clearly designed and described?
   • Are personal opinions well supported?
6. All reviews are completed entirely online; therefore, no hard copies will be sent back to authors. Referee comments must be submitted online via plain text or word processing documents.
7. At the completion of the review, each reviewer makes one of the following recommendations: Reject, Major Revisions Recommended, Accept Pending Minor Revisions, or Accept (see below for definitions of each recommendation).
8. When all reviews have been received and considered by the Editor, a decision will be made regarding the disposition of the manuscript. The following are possibilities regarding the status of manuscripts:
   • Reject: The manuscript is considered inappropriate for publication in the NASPA Journal. An e-mail is sent to the author specifying reasons for the rejection. Other sources for publication may be suggested. Direct comments from the reviewers will also be shared with the author.
   • Major Revisions Recommended: The manuscript is considered to have potential for publication, but revisions must be completed before further consideration. Reviewers’ comments are shared with the author and the author is asked to respond to these and make appropriate changes within three months. Authors are requested to submit a revised draft, but informed that these revisions do not guarantee acceptance at a later date.
   • Accept Pending Minor Revisions: Occasionally, a manuscript is considered worthy of publication pending the successful completion of a few minor revisions. Authors are requested to make the revisions and the Editor reviews the final manuscript when it is submitted to ensure that the suggestions have been appropriately addressed.
   • Accept: The manuscript is considered appropriate and timely for the NASPA Journal. An e-mail is sent to the author confirming its acceptance.
9. If a revised draft is returned, the editor and editorial assistant once again briefly review it, specifically verifying that requested changes have been addressed. Revised drafts are sent to the same three reviewers who made the first evaluation. The review process is normally expected to take no longer than five weeks.
10. The editor makes a decision regarding the status of a manuscript upon receipt of all reviewer comments regarding the revised manuscript. Authors and reviewers are notified about the manuscript status. In certain circumstances this revision process may be completed a third time.
11. If the article is accepted, it is usually published within twelve months.
12. When the article is selected by the editor to be included in an upcoming edition, it is forwarded to the technical editor in Washington, D.C. The technical editor edits the article for fine detail, sentence structure, punctuation, etc., and will contact the author, when necessary, about detail changes.
13. The editor, editorial assistant, and technical editor work with the publisher to produce the issue. The NASPA Journal is published online four times each calendar year. The Journal can be accessed through the NASPA Web site at http://www.naspa.org.