Please fill out this form of you are interested in being a Peer Reviewer for the Holistic Education Review.

Our Review Board members all have appropriate characteristics from the following list:
1. Affiliation with a holistic learning-focused institution of K-12 and/or higher education;
2. Professional membership, commitment to professional discipline and continuous improvement in holistic education;
3. Terminal credentials, such as MFA, PhD, EdD, or other evidence of scholarly inquiry in holistic education, including professional designations, technical qualifications and/or extensive experience in holistic education;
4. Publications, Conference Presentations, Shows, Performances, Installations, Projects, and other reflective scholarly works, particularly in international venues;
5. Evidence relating to professionalism of teaching and learning related to holistic education

Review Process
Academic submissions undergo a double-blinded peer review process, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. The results of the review will be returned to the author with one of four responses: unconditional acceptance, acceptance pending minor revisions, acceptance pending major revisions, or not accepted.

HER is building a peer-review board of notable holistic scholars and academics with the following job description:
1. Reviewer responsibilities toward authors
Providing written, unbiased, constructive feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer’s opinion
Indicating whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the work’s composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the journal’s readers
Avoiding personal comments or criticism
Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper

2. Reviewer responsibilities toward editors
Notifying the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner
Alerting the editor about any potential personal, financial or perceived conflict of interest and declining to review when a conflict exists
Complying with the editor’s written instructions on the journal’s expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review
Providing a thoughtful, fair, constructive, and informative critique of the submitted work, which may include supplementary material provided to the journal by the author
Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it; and, if requested, recommending acceptance or rejection using whatever rating scale the editor deems most useful
Noting any ethical concerns, such as any violation of accepted norms of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal that may be known to the reviewer
Refraining from direct author contact

3. Reviewer responsibilities toward readers
Ensuring that the article cites all relevant work