The JRRE final acceptance rate is 14%.
Peer Review Policy
Peer review is at the heart of scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable journals. The peer reviewers for JRRE play a vital role in maintaining the high standards and quality of the journal. All manuscript submissions are peer reviewed according to the procedure outlined below.
Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have poor grammar, are outside the aims and scope of the journal, or demonstrate other serious flaws. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least three experts for peer review.
Type of Peer Review JRRE employs anonymous peer review, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
Selection of Peer Reviewers Peer reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise and history of service to the journal.
Length of the Review Process The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the peer reviewers. The Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the reviewers, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts are likely to be returned to one of the initial reviewers and two new readers.
Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers.
Editor’s Decision is final Peer reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Reviewing for JRRE If you are interested in being considered to review for JRRE, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing include the opportunity to read and assess the latest work in rural educational research in its early stages, and to contribute to the overall integrity of rural educational research and its published documentation.
Ethics Statement
Guiding Principles
The Journal of Research in Rural Education is committed to the highest standards of critical scholarly review and professional publishing. Manuscripts are published on a rolling basis. The mechanisms of rigorous peer review procedures in combination with careful editorial judgment ensures that only scholarship of the highest quality is published in JRRE. Please see the peer review policy for further details.
JRRE is under the editorial direction of its independent editor or editors. The editors make publication decisions, and ensures the accuracy, completeness, and originality of every published article. JRRE makes every effort to manage the journal ethically and transparently, while adhering to the established editorial principles and practices in educational research.
Authorship
Authors are required to confirm that their submitted work does not infringe the copyright of any other party and that it is their own, original work.
Errors, Corrections, and Misconduct
When the editor becomes aware that a significant error has been published in JRRE, or in cases of plagiarism, fabrication of research, conflicts of interest, duplication of publication, and so on, the editor will review and resolve the matter in consultation with the editorial team. In in all instances, JRRE is committed to preserving the integrity of the journal, and the scholarly version of record.
JRRE adheres to and has modeled these statements off of the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines for professional publishing standards
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy
The Journal of Research in Rural Education and The Rural Educator recognize the growing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology. However, we note that its use warrants caution for a variety of reasons, including its documented racial and cultural biases. This policy offers guidance to authors, reviewers, and editors regarding the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies. As AI technologies continue to evolve, so will our policies. Please continue to refer to the respective journal pages for any updates to our policy.
AI Policy for Authors
Authors who use generative AI need to detail its use in the methods section of the manuscript, as well as the cover letter upon submission. They need to include how AI was used (e.g., finding sources, formatting tables), as well as where in the manuscript that AI-generated support was used, with APA citations, as appropriate. See https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/how-to-cite-chatgpt for an example of appropriate usage and documentation. This discussion should be sufficiently detailed so that another researcher could replicate its use and obtain similar results and readers can distinguish between AI-generated support and human-generated content. AI cannot be listed as an author and should not be used for text generation. Submission to the Rural Educator or Journal of Research in Rural Education implies consent for journal editors to use an AI-checker, if they deem it necessary. Final judgements about potential undisclosed use of AI use fall to the editors. This includes the right to reject manuscripts at any stage in the publishing process.
Generative AI Use for Tables and Figures
The use of AI for generation of tables and figures is limited to the design formatting of tables and figures. Using AI to generate the content of tables and figures is not allowed.
Language-Assistive Tools
The use of generative AI is different from the use of language-assistive tools, which authors have historically used to improve grammar and syntax (e.g., finding synonyms, correcting grammar) without declaration of such usage. However, language-assistive tools should not be used to generate full sentences.
Use of Proofreading Software
Authors may sometimes use proofreading software, such as Grammarly, to assist in meeting the requirements for English-language journals. Such use should be disclosed and described in the methods and cover letter to prevent inaccurate detection of generative AI tools.
Generative AI Policy for Reviewers
A peer-reviewed journal relies on the specialized expertise of reviewers to ensure high-quality publications that meet the journal’s unique goals and aims. To that end, we cannot accept reviews created with generative AI. We value the service to the profession reviewers provide, and through this policy, strive to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process. We ask reviewers to refrain from entering manuscripts into AI checkers. If you have concerns about potential AI use in a manuscript you’ve been asked to review, please communicate with the editor.
Additional Resources
- COPE Position Statement: Authorship and AI tools | COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics
- U.S. Copyright Office Guidance: Federal Register :: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence