Peer Review Policy

Submissions will undergo a double-blind peer review conducted by members of the Editorial Board and external reviewers. Each article will be evaluated by two reviews using a standardized rubric. Feedback will focus on originality, clarity, methodology, and adherence to scholarly standards.

The review process for Quill & Quire is designed to uphold rigorous academic standards while fostering constructive feedback for contributors. All submissions will undergo a double-blind peer review, ensuring that neither the authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities. The Submissions Editor will be responsible for anonymizing the submission and delegating the submissions for review; the Submissions Editor will not review any submissions.

To maintain consistency and transparency, all reviews will utilize a standardized rubric. This rubric ensures that submissions are assessed on criteria, including:

Originality: The extent to which the submission contributes new insights or perspectives to the field of Medieval Studies.

Clarity: The coherence of the thesis or argument, the organization of ideas, and overall readability of the submission.

Methodology: The appropriateness and rigor of the methods used to support the piece’s claims or conclusions.

Adherence to Scholarly Standards: Compliance with academic conventions, such as citation practices, accurate use of sources, and alignment with the journal’s style guidelines.

The reviewers will provide both quantitative scores (based on the rubric) and qualitative feedback to guide authors in improving their work, whether for acceptance, revision, or resubmission. This process ensures a high standard of published work and supports the professional development of undergraduate scholars.

Editorial staff and reviewers with any conflict of interest must recuse themselves from participation. Final decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief in consultation with faculty advisors as needed.