Contributed articles are peer-reviewed by three experts in each academic field of music education. The review process of the manuscript starts with the author's upload of the manuscript on the online review system, Newnonmun, developed and operated by the KMES and newnonmun. The closed peer review system does not allow the identities of the referees or the contributors to the contributors or to the referees. The following is a summary of the peer review and publication process of KMES.
Section 1. The editorial director of the Korean Music Education Society serves as the editor-in-chief of 『Korean Journal of Research in Music Education』.
Section 2. The editor-in-chief is the head of the Editorial Board composed of around seven members.
Section 3. The editor-in-chief and the editors should be full-time college professors or scholars with doctoral degrees in related fields. The editors can be reappointed.
Section 4. The editor-in-chief convenes the editorial board meeting when necessary and becomes coordinator of it. However, for the regular editing matters not requiring of severe discussions, meetings through email are possible.
Section 5. An Editorial Board meeting should be opened with the attendance of half or more editors living in Korea (not living abroad), and decisions are made by the agreement of half or more of the attendance members.
Section 6. The Editorial Board deliberates issues regarding journal submission regulations, paper review regulations and so on.
Section 7. The Editorial Board receives reports regarding submissions of papers and it plans the editing processes.
Section 8. The editor-in-chief selects three reviewers, who are professionals in each field, from the recommendations of the editors.
Section 9. The Editorial Board receives reports regarding the results of the reviewing, makes decisions on publications, and supervises the revision and editing processes. If an external online system (e.g., JAMS) is used, the system’s procedures may be applied.
Section 10. The editor-in-chief appoints the reviewers based upon the recommendations of the editors. (S)He may uses the pool of reviewers.
Section 11. The reviewers must be college professors or scholars with doctoral degrees in the related fields. There might be exceptions by the discretion of the editor-in-chief when necessary.
Section 12. The submitters are not permitted to participate in reviewing processes.
Section 13. The editors can participate in one third or less of the total number of reviews for each issue of the journal.
Section 14. The submitted paper are reviewed according to the following criteria.
1) The consistency between title and research contents 10 pts.
2) The originality of research content 15 pts.
3) The appropriateness of the use of the related literature 10 pts.
4) The appropriateness of the research method 20 pts.
5) The completeness of structure and the logics of description 15 pts.
6) The clarity of descriptions (including tables, pictures, etc.) 5 pts.
7) The contribution of results to the field 20 pts.
8) The clarity of abstract 5 pts.
Section 15. The reviewers evaluate the papers with quantified scores within the notified time period. They mark on the evaluation tables in the online evaluation system (JAMS) as following: ‘1(91-100): ’Available for Publication (AP)’, ‘2(81-90); ’Available after Revision and Approval of the Editorial Board(ARA)’; ‘3(71-80): ’Reexamination after Revision(RR)’: and ’4(under 80): ‘Not Available for Publication(NAP)’.
Section 16. The evaluation results are decided as follows based on the opinions of the three reviewers. The agreement between two reviewers is regarded with importance.
|Reviewer1||Reviewer2||Reviewer3||Evaluation results||Follow-up work|
|AP||AP||AP||AP||Contributors can make minor corrections, but important changes should be deliberated by the Editorial Board.|
|AP||ARA||ARA||ARA||After revision based on reviewers’ opinions, the Editorial Board finally decides whether or not to publish.|
|AP||RR||RR||RR||If the content of the text is uncertain or insufficient, it is revised and corrected by the author.
The re-review(s) is(are) conducted by the same reviewer(s) who gave the opinion of “re-review after revision.”
|AP||NAP||NAP||NAP||The paper is not available for publication in this issue. For the next issue, the reviewers of this issue will be referred when resubmitting.|
Section 17. For the re-review, the reviewers can only choose one of the followings: ‘1(91-100): ’Available for Publication (AP)’, ’2(81-90): ‘Available after Revision and Approval of the Editorial Board(ARA)’, and ‘4(0-70): ’Not Available for Publication(NAP)’.
Section 18. The reviewers must comply with Section three of the Code of Ethics of Korean Journal of Research in Music Education.
Section 19. The personal information of the submitters should not be disclosed to anyone, and must be processed according to regulations.
Section 20. The issues not specified in these regulations shall be processed by the discretion of the editor-in-chief according to precedents and shall be reported to the Editorial Board.
This regulation takes effect on 1 March 2012. Supplementary Provisions
This regulation takes effect on 1 March 2014.
This regulation takes effect on 1 December 2014, even though it is possible to be delayed only for the next issue (Vol.44, No.1) due to the execution of online system (JAMS).
This regulation takes effect on 7 May 2016.
Any opinion or inquiry during the process of publication can be addressed to the editor-in-chief. Authors also can show complains and appeals regarding the review results through contacting the editor-in-chief. They are not allowed to contact the reviewers, about whom they have no information. The editor-in-chief or Editorial Board is responsible for handling the author's complains or appeals.
Review Fee: 90,000 won
Publication Fee: 200,000 won (+ 10,000 won, when exceeding 20 pages)
Bank Account: Post Office 101220-02-048775 (KMES, Daneun Kwon)