Peer Review Guidelines

Preamble: Purpose of the Journal

The Journal of Academic Library Practice is a diamond open-access journal dedicated to the everyday work, creativity, and evolving expertise of academic library staff. It provides a space for practitioners to reflect on, document, and share their professional practice while engaging in discourse on both innovative and traditional approaches.

The journal’s purpose is threefold:

  • To support professional development, particularly of new and early-career colleagues, by offering an inclusive, low-barrier entry into academic writing without compromising scholarly rigour.
  • To foster a culture of reflection, learning, and collaboration, where library staff work together to address shared challenges, test ideas, and advance both local and collective knowledge.
  • To develop the next generation of librarian-researchers, equipping them with the confidence, skills, and experience needed to contribute meaningfully to the profession.

Peer review is therefore understood as a developmental, mentoring process. Reviewers play a crucial role not only in strengthening manuscripts but also in supporting authors as they grow their confidence and capacity in academic writing. Feedback should be constructive, collegial, and focused on helping authors refine their arguments, deepen their engagement with relevant literature, and articulate their practice-based insights in clear, accessible ways.

Principles for Reviewers

When reviewing, please keep in mind that this journal is here to help authors grow as writers and researchers. Many contributors are new to publishing, so your feedback should guide and support them.

  • Be helpful - Give feedback that helps the author improve their work.
  • Be respectful - Point out what the author did well before suggesting changes.
  • Be supportive - Remember many authors are writing for the first time; give clear, practical advice.
  • Be honest and fair - Check that arguments, ideas, and sources are accurate and make sense.
  • Be inclusive - Notice if the work brings in different voices, local perspectives, or new ways of thinking.

What to look for in a manuscript

  1. Clarity and flow
  • Is the main idea or argument clear?
  • Does the writing flow in a logical order?
  • Are key terms or ideas explained simply and consistently?
  1. Usefulness for library practice
  • Can library staff learn something practical from this work?
  • Does the author share examples, projects, or cases that others can use?
  • Are real challenges in library work discussed?
  1. Transformative and developmental focus
  • Does the paper question traditional or limited ways of doing library work?
  • Does it bring in inclusive or local voices and knowledge?
  • Does it help staff reflect, grow, or improve their practice?
  1. Writing and style
  • Is the writing clear and easy to follow?
  • Is technical language explained where needed?
  • Are references correct, up to date, and relevant?
  • Is the tone consistent?
  1. How the paper could improve
  • What are the strongest points of the paper?
  • What are the main areas where it could be better?
  • What extra examples, sources, or ideas might help the author? 

Reviewer’s role as mentor

As reviewers, you are not only assessing quality but also mentoring authors through feedback. Consider:

  • Offering resources (articles, books, frameworks) the author might consult.
  • Suggesting structural or stylistic changes in a way that empowers rather than discourages.
  • Identifying both strengths and opportunities—what is working well, and what could be enhanced.

Final notes

  • Your feedback will directly influence the growth of librarian-researchers and help shape a body of scholarship that is innovative, inclusive, and transformative.
  • Please complete your review within the requested timeline and use supportive, professional language.