Submissions are reviewed in two different processes, either reviewed internally by members of the editorial team or externally in a double-blind peer review process.

Articles submitted for consideration in the categories ‘Articles’ and ‘Education’ are anonymously peer-reviewed by two independent external reviewers (double-blind). These reviewers will recommend a. publication; b. publication with minor/major revisions or c. no publication. The editorial team will make the decision if a submission will be published based on the outcome of the peer-review process and discuss the decision and requested revisions with the author. If a submission is accepted subject to revisions, the revised re-submission will be sent out for additional review.

Submissions for the categories ‘Miscellanea’, ‘Primary Sources’, ‘Book Reviews’ and non-academic reports for ‘Education’ are reviewed and assessed by the commissioning editors, in consultation with other editorial team members. If appropriate, the editorial team may send contributions to external reviewers. Authors will be kept informed if their submission has been accepted or further revision is required.

We aim to communicate the outcome of the peer-review process in a detailed, clear and transparent manner. We reserve the right to ask for further revisions if required prior to publication to meet our high-quality publication standard.

Once accepted, manuscripts will be copy-edited and the necessary corrections will be discussed with the authors. Authors will also have the opportunity to check the completed PDF version of their article before publication online.