Radical Teacher's process for considering manuscripts.

When we get an unsolicited article, unless it is clearly outside our boundaries, the manuscript coordinator sends it to four readers from the editorial group. The coordinator also evaluates the article. So most manuscripts get five readings.

Usually a couple of the readers will be fairly expert in the subject of the article, and the others will be in different areas or from different levels of educational work. The attempt is to critique articles both for sound and current knowledge and for general interest and readability.

When all the readings are in, the coordinator weights the readers' opinions and makes a decision based on them. That decision may be a plain "accept" or "reject." Or it may be one of the three other possibilities. (1) We tell some authors that if they make specific revisions, we will accept the revised article. (2) With others, we encourage revision and give suggestions (often derailed) for making revisions. We indicate that we hope to work with the author toward publication, but cannot guarantee it. (3) We tell other authors that we would be glad to read a drastic revision, or a different kind of article about the same subject. In every case except that of immediate acceptance or that of a totally unacceptable article, we try to give helpful criticism. And, though we don't always manage it, we try to get the article and critique back to the author in two or three months.

When authors do submit revisions, the original readers may read the new version or we may bring in new readers from the editorial group.

Articles written for a "cluster" focused on a particular topic go directly to the "cluster" editors. Generally these articles have been solicited in response to proposals from the authors whose proposals have been encouraged. The "cluster" editors work with the authors toward publication. Prospectuses for non-cluster articles get the same treatment as unsolicited manuscripts.