Submission Preparation ChecklistAs part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- All authors with their contact information and institutional biographies (about 100 words) are included.
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
- The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
- Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
- The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
- The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
Format for Book Reviews
Include the following information for each book reviewed:
- author(s) or editor(s)
- place of publication
- date of publication
- number of pages
Provide the following information after the heading and before the first paragraph: Reviewed by (Your First Name, Your Last Name), (Your Institution).
In the Submission Process
- Include a 100-word reviewer biography.
- Use the first paragraph of the review as the abstract during the submission process.
Style and Content
Focus your review on those concerns most relevant to our target audience: technical, professional, and scientific communication administrators and faculty who are interested in the theory and practice of program development and administration. If appropriate, focus your review on how the text(s) contribute to just one aspect of the profession—for example, programmatic assessment or curriculum development. We encourage you to omit relatively minor concerns, such as minute details about what each chapter contains.
- Length of review for single work: 1250 words
- Length of review for multiple volumes: 2000 words
If possible, address the following concerns in your review:
- how the text(s) specifically contributes to the profession in terms of programmatic issues and perspectives or how it fails to do so
- how the text(s) compare with similar ones in the profession
Do not feel obligated to provide extensive evidence (including direct quotations) from the text(s) to support your claims. In fact, we might need to edit supporting evidence to reduce length.
If you decide to provide supporting evidence:
- include page citations for quoted material (for example, Smith makes a strong case that “the profession will raise its stature considerably if more quality research on this topic is completed” (p. 143)
- include an author’s first and last name on first reference. Subsequent references should only be last names.
- provide full citations for other publications mentioned in your review
- include authors’ first names in the References
The Council of Programs in Technical and Scientific Communication (CPTSC) requires the following agreements of prospective authors.
- Authors acknowledge that their submission is original material, not previously published, and not under simultaneous consideration by any other publication
- Authors grant the CPTSC permission to publish the submission in Programmatic Perspectives. Authors acknowledge that Programmatic Perspectives is an online publication, and that the submission will thus be available in that form indefinitely
The CPTSC grants colleges, universities, and libraries permission to use materials published in Programmatic Perspectives free of charge for educational purposes.