Reviewer Instructions: New Quantitative Techniques

Analytics operates at the intersection of many fields, including writing studies, educational measurement, massive data analysis, digital learning ecologies, and ethical philosophy. Intended to give voice to an emerging community, the journal is devoted to programs of research providing evidence of fair, reliable, and valid analytics. Dedicated to application, such multidisciplinary research will demonstrate its usefulness to educational stakeholders as they expand opportunities for diverse learners.

To advance this emerging field of study, we have provided detailed Author Guidelines for New Quantitative Techniques. Based on those guidelines, the categories below ask reviewers to make a series of judgements on each section of the manuscript. After providing scores, reviewers are then asked to provide notes that justify and explain their assessment of the given section of the manuscript.

Reviewers should enact Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices, which The Journal of Writing Analytics and the WAC Clearinghouse endorse. Further, reviewer notes should work to enhance the writing analytics community and strengthen the work developing from this emerging field by:

1. Evaluating the manuscript rather than the manuscript’s writer. When writing your reviewer notes, consider crafting sentences that use grammatical subjects like the manuscript, the text, or the article, rather than grammatical subjects like the author, the writer, or you.
2. Balancing critique with suggestion. When offering a critique of the manuscript, please translate the critique into a suggestion for how the manuscript could be improved, taking time to explain the basis for the criticism and the rationale for the suggestion.
3. Defining key terms and using accessible language. Since the journal appeals to a multidisciplinary audience, please take extra time and extra space in your reviewer notes to establish any key constructs and foundational concepts that need additional attention in the manuscript.
4. Using local context and individual perspective to ground feedback and qualify reviewer notes. The review process should contribute to an exchange of perspective that strengthens research and knowledge-making in the writing analytics community. Help manuscript authors understand your perspective by providing context behind your notes and working to mitigate any biases.
5. Recommending supplementary research sources that build upon existing knowledge, engage a diverse body of scholarship, validate alternative ways of meaning making, and recognize alternative forms of expertise. Please support and strengthen the research base of the manuscript by pointing to ways the manuscript might more inclusively draw upon a wider range of extant work across disciplines.   

      

Submission Title

 

Publishing Recommendation

Please select only one recommendation:	Publish as is	Publish with minor changes	Revise and resubmit	Reject
Please briefly explain your decision:

 

Comment Category 1: Abstract

The abstract (250 words or less) is written in accessible language, presents a structured overview of the study, and uses the following headings: technique identification, value contribution, technique application, and future directions.

Very Strongly Agree	Strongly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree	Very Strongly Disagree
6	5	4	3	2	1

Notes on Structured Abstract:

 

Comment Category 2: Technique Identification

This section identifies the technique, positions the quantitative technique under examination, and explains its significance. This section includes information on the origin and development of the technique under examination, as well as the research capability of the technique to advance writing analytics.

Very Strongly Agree	Strongly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree	Very Strongly Disagree
6	5	4	3	2	1

Notes on Technique Identification:

 

Comment Category 3: Value Contribution

The section includes information that positions the technique as it advances evidence related to fairness, validity, and reliability. Additionally, information is provided that centers the technique in traditions such as classical test theory, generalizability theory, and item response theory. The proposed value is very specific in terms of the power of the technique to add to knowledge related to evidential categories of fairness, validity, and reliability.

Very Strongly Agree	Strongly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree	Very Strongly Disagree
6	5	4	3	2	1

Notes on Establishing the Value Contribution:

 

Comment Category 4: Technique Application

The application section describes the usefulness of the technique. Examples should be used with existing data sets (such as those catalogued by the WAC Corpus Collection), so that readers will be able to quickly realize the force of the technique. Methodology here is important so that other researchers may use the technique in their own research. When possible, high-quality visualizations are used to communicate the application. High-quality visualizations are used to communicate technique application.

Very Strongly Agree	Strongly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree	Very Strongly Disagree
6	5	4	3	2	1

Notes on Technique Application:

 

Comment Category 5: Directions for Further Research

The manuscript concludes with directions for further research that the technique affords. Special attention should be paid to the principles that will guide future research.

Very Strongly Agree	Strongly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Strongly Disagree	Very Strongly Disagree
6	5	4	3	2	1

Notes on Directions for Further Research:

 

Reviewer Notes

Please provide any additional integrative notes on the manuscript related to your publishing recommendation.