Our journal policies align with the policies and procedures outlined in the Common Ground Research Network which can be found here: https://cgnetworks.org
Our approach to peer review seeks to be inclusive, founded on the most rigorous and merit-based anonymous peer-review processes. What makes us different is that those who write for Common Ground’s academic journals and/or participate as presenters at Common Ground’s academic conferences also serve as peer reviewers, creating a sustainable cycle of high-quality feedback. Reviewers are assigned on the basis of subject matter and disciplinary expertise. Ranking is based on clearly articulated criteria. The result is a peer-review process that is scrupulously fair in its assessments and at the same time offers a carefully structured and constructive contribution to the shape of the published article.
The result of our anonymous peer review is a publishing process that is without prejudice to institutional affiliation, stage in career, national origins, or disciplinary perspective. If the article is excellent, and has been systematically and independently assessed as such, it will be published. This is why Common Ground’s academic journals are filled with exciting new material. While many articles originate from well-known research institutions, a considerable amount of brilliantly insightful and innovative material is contributed by academics in lesser-known institutions in the developing world, emerging researchers, people working in hard-to-classify interdisciplinary spaces, and researchers in liberal arts colleges and teaching universities.
We believe there are limitations both in high-cost commercial publishing and open access publishing models without professional publishing support infrastructure. At Common Ground Research Networks, we are working to develop a low-cost commercial approach to academic publishing that supports a professional publishing staff. Our desire is to find a practical middle ground between the idealism of open access and the inefficiencies and high-costs of the big journal publishers. This is the basis of Common Ground | Open. Meanwhile, we ensure non-open access content remains highly accessible through modest access charges for libraries and a small per-article charge for electronic access by non-subscribers. We also make all of our journal available in both print and electronic formats, allowing us to make new content available online as soon as it is ready for publication.
However, we also have specific criteria related to the submission process which we will update as we develop the project here:
We have a rolling submission policy with four themed symposium events for 2020/21
- June 2020 – Become the Media
- September 2020 – History is not the past, it is the present!
- December 2020 – Cinema and the Christmas myth
- March 2021 – Video Essay as Social Justice Intervention Method
We aim to peer assess submissions between 4-6 weeks
All video essay submissions must contain a ‘position statement’ regarding the intended context, discipline, placement and reception of the work
The work must not be previously published in any other format or platform
Key assessment criteria centres around how your work:
- Provides a critical position
- Engages with the form and format of video essay as a distinctive audio-visual form
- Clearly focused research question or positioning with in a field and makes a contribution to the discussions with this field
- Provides a structure – academic, narrative or artistic
We will provide a guide rubric ASAP to outline the peer assessment criteria
(policies are currently being updated, so please check before making your submission)