Reviewer Guidelines
The KORA Journal of Korean Language & Studies (KJKS) relies on the expertise and commitment of qualified reviewers to maintain the quality, integrity and academic standard of published research. A new journal is only as good as the people who read for it.
Role of the Reviewer
Reviewers are responsible for:
- assessing the originality and significance of the research
- evaluating the soundness of the method and the analysis
- judging whether the evidence presented actually supports the claims made
- assessing clarity, structure and presentation
- checking the handling of Korean-language data — romanization, glossing and translation
- identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript
- providing constructive suggestions for improvement
- recommending a publication decision to the editor
Conducting the Review
When reviewing a manuscript, consider:
- relevance to the journal's aims and scope
- novelty and contribution to knowledge
- methodological validity
- accuracy of results and interpretation
- consistency and accuracy of Korean examples, glosses and romanization
- quality of writing and organisation
- adequacy and accuracy of references
- ethical compliance — consent, ethics approval, and disclosure of generative AI use
Review Recommendations
• AcceptPublishable as it stands
• Minor RevisionAccepted in principle; the editor checks the revision
• Major RevisionResubmission invited and re-reviewed
• RejectNot publishable here, with the specific reason
Reviewers advise; editors decide. Your recommendation is weighed alongside the second report and the editor's own reading, and you will be sent the other report and the final decision so you can see how a colleague read the same manuscript.
Timeliness
Reviewers are asked to complete a report within 21 days, with a reminder at day 14. If you cannot meet the deadline, tell the editorial office promptly — an extension is almost always possible, and a manuscript kept waiting in silence is the single most common failure in scholarly publishing. A fast decline is more useful to us than a slow acceptance, and declining never affects future invitations.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts and review materials are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss or use their content for personal or professional advantage, and must not upload them to any generative AI service.
Conflict of Interest
Decline any assignment where a conflict of interest exists — personal, professional, financial or institutional. If you recognise the author part-way through a review and a conflict emerges, tell the editor at once rather than finishing the report.
Constructive Feedback
Reviews should be respectful, professional and focused on scholarly improvement. Personal criticism of an author is not acceptable. Write the report you would want to receive: specific, evidenced, and clear about what would fix each problem.
Review Ethics
Peer review only works if everyone involved behaves as though it matters. These are the obligations a KJKS reviewer accepts on agreeing to review, and they are also printed on the report form.
Confidentiality
- A manuscript under review is an unpublished, confidential document. Do not share it, forward it, or discuss its content with anyone outside the editorial process.
- Do not use its findings, data or ideas in your own work before publication.
- Do not upload a manuscript, in whole or in part, to any generative AI service. This is a breach of confidentiality, not a grey area.
- You may use an AI tool to polish the language of your own report, but the judgements must be yours, and the use must be declared to the editor.
- Do not contact the author directly, even if you work out who they are.
Objectivity and Conflicts
- Judge the work, not the author's institution, nationality, career stage or presumed identity.
- Decline where you have collaborated with, supervised or been supervised by a likely author within three years, work in the same department, have a close personal relationship, or stand to gain from the outcome.
- Decline where the manuscript competes directly with your own unpublished work.
- Declare any connection to The Korean Academy. It does not disqualify you — it tells the editors which manuscripts not to send you.
Competence
Accept only what you are competent to assess. Reviewing outside your expertise helps nobody, and it is the fastest way for a small journal to lose credibility. If you can assess part of a manuscript but not another part — the linguistics but not the statistics, say — accept and tell the editor exactly which part you are qualified to judge, so a second reader can cover the rest.
Reporting a Concern
If you suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, missing consent or undisclosed AI use, describe what you saw and where you saw it — do not accuse, and do not investigate on your own. The editor investigates, following the journal's publication ethics policy, and the author is given the evidence and a chance to respond.
Anonymity and Recognition
- Review is double-blind. Your identity is never disclosed to authors, and the manuscript you receive carries no author details.
- Reviewers are named, with permission, in the annual acknowledgement published each December. You may decline to be named and it makes no difference to whether we invite you.
- A certificate of review is available on request for your own records or ORCID profile.
Become a Reviewer
KJKS is building its reviewer pool across all of the journal's subject areas. Applications are open and are reviewed as they arrive. Everyone who wishes to review for the journal — including people invited personally by an editor — completes the same application form, so that the basis on which reviewers are selected is a matter of record.
Two requirements
Requirement 1
An ORCID iD
Every reviewer must have an ORCID iD. It is free, takes about two minutes to create at orcid.org, and it is how your review record stays attached to you rather than to an email address you may one day lose. Applications without one cannot be processed.
Requirement 2
Any two of eight criteria
You must meet at least two of the eight criteria below, and give evidence for each one you claim. They are deliberately varied: research degrees, publications, teaching, translation practice and demonstrated proficiency all count, and no single route is privileged over another.
Eligibility criteria — meet any two
- A doctorate, completed or in progress, in Korean linguistics, Korean studies, applied linguistics, language education, translation studies or a closely related field.
- A master's degree in one of the journal's subject areas.
- A bachelor's degree in Korean language, Korean linguistics or Korean studies, together with demonstrable further specialisation in the area you wish to review.
- At least one peer-reviewed publication — journal article, book chapter or full conference paper — within the journal's scope.
- At least two years' experience teaching Korean at institutional level, in a university, language institute or accredited academy.
- Prior peer-review experience for a journal, conference or academic press.
- TOPIK Level 5 or 6, or equivalent demonstrable advanced proficiency in Korean.
- Professional experience in Korean–English translation or interpreting, with a portfolio or client record.
A note to students and recent graduates
If you have completed — or are completing — a degree in Korean linguistics, Korean studies or a related field, at bachelor's, master's or doctoral level, and you have a good command of Korean, we strongly encourage you to apply. You do not need a publication record, and you do not need a doctorate. Criteria F2, F3, F5, F7 and F8 exist precisely so that capable people without a long CV can qualify.
Early-career reviewers are matched only to manuscripts within their stated competence, are never asked to assess methods they have not been trained in, and receive the other reviewer's report alongside the decision — which is, in practice, one of the better ways to learn how the field judges work.
What we ask in return is honesty about what you can and cannot assess. Section G of the form asks you to tick your areas: please be conservative. Declining a manuscript that falls outside your competence is a mark of a good reviewer, not a failing.
The application form
The form below is the complete application. Copy it into a document or into the body of an email, fill in every section, and send it with your CV. Do not delete sections — write “N/A” where something does not apply.
KJKS Reviewer Application Form
Ten sections: contact details, ORCID and profiles, education, current position, Korean proficiency, the eligibility criteria, areas of expertise, publications, availability, and the reviewer declarations.
FORM
kjks-reviewer-application-form.txt 237 lines · press Copy above, then fill it in
================================================================================
KORA JOURNAL OF KOREAN LANGUAGE & STUDIES (KJKS)
코라 한국어 및 한국학 연구 저널
REVIEWER APPLICATION FORM
Published by The Korean Academy
================================================================================
HOW TO SUBMIT
1. Complete every section below. Do not delete any section; write "N/A" where
something does not apply.
2. Attach your CV (PDF preferred).
3. Email both to: admission@thekoreanacad.com
4. Subject line: KJKS Reviewer Application - [Full Name] - [Country]
BEFORE YOU START -- two things are required of every applicant
* An ORCID iD. Registration is free and takes two minutes at orcid.org.
Applications without an ORCID iD cannot be processed.
* At least TWO of the eight eligibility criteria in Section F.
Date of application: ____________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION A -- PERSONAL AND CONTACT DETAILS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A1. Title (Mr / Ms / Mx / Dr / Prof / other):
A2. Full name (as it should appear in the reviewer acknowledgement):
A3. Name in Hangul, if you have one:
A4. Preferred name form for correspondence:
A5. Email address:
A6. Alternative email:
A7. Phone (with country code):
A8. Country of residence:
A9. City:
A10. Time zone:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION B -- IDENTIFIERS (B1 is mandatory)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B1. ORCID iD (required): https://orcid.org/____-____-____-____
B2. Google Scholar profile URL:
B3. ResearchGate / Academia.edu / institutional profile URL:
B4. Personal or departmental web page:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION C -- EDUCATION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List your highest qualification first. Add rows as needed. Include qualifications
currently in progress, marking them "in progress" with the expected year.
C1. Degree / Level :
Field of study :
Institution :
Country :
Year awarded / expected :
Thesis or dissertation title (if any):
C2. Degree / Level :
Field of study :
Institution :
Country :
Year awarded / expected :
Thesis or dissertation title (if any):
C3. Degree / Level :
Field of study :
Institution :
Country :
Year awarded / expected :
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION D -- CURRENT POSITION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D1. Current role / job title:
D2. Department:
D3. Institution or organisation:
D4. Country:
D5. Since (month / year):
D6. If you are a student, state your programme, year of study, and the name of
your supervisor (we do not contact them without asking you first):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION E -- KOREAN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E1. TOPIK level attained: Level ______ Year: ______
E2. TOPIK certificate number (optional):
E3. Other evidence of proficiency (degree taught in Korean, residence in Korea,
professional translation work, native or heritage speaker, KIIP level, etc.):
E4. Can you review a manuscript written in Korean? Yes / No
E5. Can you review a manuscript written in English? Yes / No
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION F -- ELIGIBILITY (tick AT LEAST TWO, and give the evidence)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] F1. A doctorate (completed or in progress) in Korean linguistics, Korean
studies, applied linguistics, language education, translation studies or
a closely related field.
Evidence:
[ ] F2. A master's degree in one of the journal's subject areas.
Evidence:
[ ] F3. A bachelor's degree in Korean language, Korean linguistics or Korean
studies, together with demonstrable further specialisation in the area
you wish to review.
Evidence:
[ ] F4. At least one peer-reviewed publication -- journal article, book chapter
or full conference paper -- within the journal's scope.
Evidence (full citation):
[ ] F5. At least two years' experience teaching Korean at institutional level
(university, language institute or accredited academy).
Evidence:
[ ] F6. Prior peer-review experience for a journal, conference or academic press.
Evidence (name of venue; you need not name the manuscripts):
[ ] F7. TOPIK Level 5 or 6, or equivalent demonstrable advanced proficiency.
Evidence:
[ ] F8. Professional experience in Korean-English translation or interpreting,
with a portfolio or client record.
Evidence:
Number of criteria ticked: ______ (minimum 2)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION G -- AREAS OF EXPERTISE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G1. Tick every subject area you are competent to review. Please be honest and
conservative: reviewing outside your competence helps nobody.
[ ] Korean phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics or pragmatics
[ ] Historical linguistics and language change
[ ] Sociolinguistics, dialectology and variation
[ ] Corpus linguistics and Korean natural language processing
[ ] Lexicography, terminology and romanization
[ ] Curriculum, syllabus and materials design
[ ] Classroom method, practice and teacher development
[ ] Assessment, testing and TOPIK research
[ ] Second-language acquisition and learner corpora
[ ] Heritage learners, bilingualism and diaspora education
[ ] Technology-assisted and AI-supported language learning
[ ] Korean literature -- classical
[ ] Korean literature -- modern and contemporary
[ ] Film, television, popular music and digital media
[ ] History, society, religion and intellectual thought
[ ] Migration, diaspora and Korean communities abroad
[ ] Literary translation
[ ] Technical translation, interpreting and subtitling
[ ] Language policy and cultural diplomacy
[ ] Other (specify): ______________________________________
G2. Five keywords describing what you can review:
G3. Methods you are competent to assess (for example: corpus analysis,
experimental design, statistics, discourse analysis, ethnography,
classroom action research, archival method):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION H -- SELECTED PUBLICATIONS (up to five, most relevant first)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full citations, APA 7th style. Write "None yet" if you have none -- this does not
disqualify you where other criteria are met.
H1.
H2.
H3.
H4.
H5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION I -- REVIEW EXPERIENCE AND AVAILABILITY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I1. Have you reviewed for a journal, conference or press before? Yes / No
I2. If yes, where, and roughly how many manuscripts:
I3. How many manuscripts can you review per year? (we ask for no more than 3)
I4. Any period in the coming year when you will be unavailable:
I5. Would you be willing to review a manuscript at short notice if a reviewer
withdraws? Yes / No
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION J -- DECLARATIONS (initial each line)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
____ The information given in this form is accurate and complete.
____ I will keep every manuscript sent to me confidential; I will not share it,
discuss it with anyone outside the editorial process, or use its content
before publication.
____ I will not upload a manuscript, in whole or in part, to any generative AI
service. I understand this is a breach of confidentiality.
____ I will declare any conflict of interest and will decline to review the
work of a close colleague, co-author within three years, classmate,
student, supervisor or anyone in my own department.
____ I will decline promptly, rather than accept and delay, when a manuscript
falls outside my competence or I cannot meet the deadline.
____ I will write reviews that are professional and constructive, and will not
make personal criticism of an author.
J1. Do you consent to being named in the journal's annual reviewer
acknowledgement? (You may say no; it makes no difference to whether we
invite you.) Yes / No
J2. Do you have any connection to The Korean Academy -- as a student, alumnus,
employee, teacher or contractor? This does not disqualify you; it tells us
which manuscripts we must not send you.
Yes / No. If yes, describe:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNATURE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signed: ____________________________ Date: ____________________
(A typed name is accepted for an emailed application.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENTS CHECKLIST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] This completed form
[ ] Curriculum vitae (PDF preferred) -- required
[ ] TOPIK certificate or proficiency evidence (optional)
[ ] One publication or writing sample (optional, but helpful if you have no
publication record yet)
================================================================================
Send to: admission@thekoreanacad.com
Subject: KJKS Reviewer Application - [Full Name] - [Country]
You will receive an acknowledgement within 3 to 5 working days. Successful
applicants are added to the reviewer database and matched to manuscripts in
their stated areas. We aim not to invite any reviewer more than three times
a year.
================================================================================
How to submit
Send your application to
admission@thekoreanacad.com
Subject line:
KJKS Reviewer Application - [Full Name] - [Country]- Complete the form in full. Every section, with evidence for each eligibility criterion you claim.
- Attach your CV — PDF preferred. This is required, not optional. It should show your education, any teaching or research posts, and your publications if you have them.
- Attach supporting evidence if you have it — a TOPIK certificate, or one publication or writing sample. Optional, but genuinely helpful if you have no publication record yet.
- Email everything to admission@thekoreanacad.com using the subject line above.
What happens next
| Stage | What happens | Timeline |
|---|---|---|
| Acknowledgement | We confirm receipt of your application and CV | 3–5 working days |
| Assessment | An editor checks the ORCID, the two criteria and the evidence given | 2–3 weeks |
| Outcome | You are added to the reviewer database, or told what is missing | Within 3 weeks |
| First invitation | Sent when a manuscript matches your stated areas — which may be some months away | As manuscripts arrive |
If your application is not accepted
We will tell you why, and what would change the answer. Most unsuccessful applications fail on one of two things: no ORCID iD, or only one criterion met with no evidence attached. Both are fixable, and you are welcome to apply again as soon as they are.
Being listed as a KJKS reviewer requires your consent, and no one is named publicly without it. You may withdraw from the reviewer pool at any time by writing to the editorial office.