Get Involved

    Are you interested in getting more involved with TIA? See the options below for ways you can help shape the journal:

    A Call for Guest Editors

    Important Dates

    • Submission deadline: November 6, 2020
    • Guest editor notification: November 12, 2020
    • Manuscripts available for review: December 1, 2020
    • Reviews due: December 17, 2020


    Would you like to help advance scholarship in the field of educational development? We are looking for three guest editors for our TIA Special Issue on Educational Development in a Time of Crises. This is a great opportunity to work closely with the editorial team and get experience behind-the-scenes of a peer-reviewed academic journal.

    We encourage those newer to the scholarship of educational development and those whose voices are typically underrepresented in educational development to apply, especially given that racial inequity is one of the crises to be featured in this special issue. You must be a current POD Network member to apply. Previous experience with publishing and reviewing processes is expected, but you do not need to be a published author to apply. No previous editorial experience is required.


    In the first two weeks of December, guest editors will review 3-5 submitted manuscripts and work with the editorial team to make decisions on the articles. Guest editors will also communicate with the authors during the publication process (January-February/March).

    We expect guest editors to:

    • provide constructive feedback on the merits of the work
    • manage multiple tasks and meet the deadlines listed above

    Application Submission

    To express interest in the position, submit a brief letter to the TIA editorial team by November 6. The letter should include why you are interested in the position and your previous experience with the reviewing and publishing process in educational development (or related fields).

    Editorial Team:

    Become a TIA Reviewer

    The TIA editorial team is always recruiting reviewers to provide constructive feedback to authors in a timely fashion. You do not need to have published in TIA or have previous manuscript reviewing experience. To sign up, visit:

    Expectations for Reviewers

    Reviewers for TIA may be asked to review 1-2 manuscripts each year. When signing up to review, you will be able to indicate your areas of interest and expertise, which the editors will use to assign appropriate manuscripts to you.

    We expect reviews to be completed within 30 days.

    Review Considerations

    Below are the criteria provided to TIA reviewers to help guide their feedback.

    1. Recommendation
      • Indicate which of the following options you recommend for this article: Accept; Minor Revisions; Major Revisions; Reject. Accept indicates a well-developed and -written manuscript suitable for publication following final copyediting.
        • Minor Revisions indicates a solid manuscript that could be improved with minor revisions to organization, clarity, argument, and/or other components; this recommendation typically doesn't trigger re-review.
        • Major Revisions indicates a manuscript that requires significant revision to organization, clarity, argument, and/or other components; this recommendation automatically triggers re-review.
        • Reject indicates a manuscript currently unsuitable for publication because it lacks organization, clarity, argument, or other components, is pitched for the wrong audience, is not situated in the literature, among other things.
    2. Content and argument
      • Comment on the originality, relevance and scholarly rigor of the article.
      • Comment on whether existing literature in this area has been considered: is any relevant work missing? Are references to existing work accurate?
      • Do the introduction and conclusion reflect the argument in the main text?
    3. Writing style
      • Is the manuscript logically structured and does the argument flow coherently?
      • Does the introduction detail the argument in a logical way and does the conclusion adequately summarize it?
      • Comment on the quality of the writing style, including, as appropriate, on spelling, punctuation and grammar.
    4. Figures
      • Comment on the article’s effective use of tables, charts, figures, images or maps.
      • Note if any of the above are missing captions or keys, or require any further editing or clarification.
    5. Formatting
      • Does the manuscript adhere to the journal's formatting guidelines?
      • Are citations and references formatted to house style?
    6. General comments
      • If desired, provide additional comments and suggestions for improvement.