The best way to submit an article, project, or review to Enculturation is to post it to our conference queue:
- Create an account
- Log in
- Click "Create content" under the user navigation menu
- Click "Submission"
- Enter the title of your submission in the "title" field
- Enter your name, email address, and an abstract in the "body" field
- Ensure that there are no identifying names in your text or document name
- Attach Word or media file
- click "submit" at the bottom of the page
If you send an attachment, Word files in DOC or RTF are preferable. For hypertext or media projects you may initially submit a URL but will ultimately need to send a blind WinZipped version of the project for review.
Authors can track or edit their submissions by selecting the "my paper" link in the user navigation menu.
Enculturation 2.0 operates on rolling submissions. Submissions will be reviewed as they are submitted and posted as soon as they are approved for publication, formatted, and copy-edited. Published content will be listed under the heading "New Articles and Reviews" on the right side of the page. At appropriate times throughout the year, the most recent content will be assigned a new issue number and listed in a table of contents. This allows us to combine a more immediate publication schedule with the traditional notion of issues.
For general journal inquiries email: byron [dot] hawk [at] gmail [dot] com
For inquires about submissions and the review process, please email: casey [dot] boyle [at] utexas [dot] edu
We also accept the submission of books for review from publishers or individuals. They will be listed in the Reviews section in the main menu. Please send them to the address below.
ENCULTURATION c/o Byron Hawk
Department of English
Humanities Office Building
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208
Enculturation is a blind peer-reviewed journal. Once a submission is posted in the queue, the Managing Editor will review it and determine whether it will be assigned to members of the editorial board for review. If the Managing Editor determines that a submission does not fit within the scope of Enculturation or is otherwise unsuitable for blind review, s/he will provide feedback explaining this decision. Once a submission has been reviewed by the Managing Editor, it is assigned to two editorial board members who review the submissions based on the following format:
General Evaluation (select appropriate numbers):
___1. The submission is significant and sound, falls within the scope of Enculturation, and should be published with only minor revisions.
___2. The submission is basically significant and sound but requires rewriting to make it a solid publishable contribution.
___3. The submission requires major rewriting and it should be revised and resubmitted for review.
___4. The submission is sound but does not fall within the scope of Enculturation and should not be included.
___5. The submission does not exhibit a broad enough understanding of the field and does not warrant further consideration by Enculturation.
Comments to the Author:
Reviewers will include elaborations on selections from 1-5 above and note specific places for revision, suggestions for cutting, or other issues with the text.
Comments to the Managing Editor:
Submissions that enter the editorial queue recieve two blind reviews from different board members, who then submit their responses to the Managing Editor.
Feedback to Authors:
Once these reviews have been examined, the Managing Editor selects the pieces s/he feels warrant inclusion in Enculturation and informs the authors of this decision (providing the author with copies of each blind review). The Managing Editor will send one of three possibile responses to the author:
1) Accepted: The submission is accepted for publication with minor revisions. This response coincides with evaluation #1 above.
2) Revise and Resubmit: The submission is basically significant and sound but requires rewriting to make it a solid publishable contribution. This response coincides with evaluation #2 or #3 above.
3) Not Accepted: The submission is not accepted for publication. This response coincides with evaluation #4 or #5 above.
Authors who are asked to revise and resubmit will also be asked to include a brief cover letter explaining how they have addressed the concerns of the editorial board. Once the submission is resubmitted, it will be sent to the same two blind reviewers who read the initial submission.
Authors of accepted submissions will be asked to make any needed revisions and to return their work to the Managing Editor for final review. Once the Managing Editor is confident that the author has adressed the concerns of the editorial board, s/he submits the manuscript to the Production Editor for formatting. The manuscript is then reviewed by the Copy Editor. After the manuscript has been formatted and copy edited, the author will be asked to review the piece. Authors will be given one week to check for accuracy or any other issues. At this point, the submission will be published and will appear in the "New Articles and Reviews" box on the right side of the page.