Home > Submission Guide > Evaluating Regulations
Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of this regulation is to evaluate [Journal of Competency Development & Learning] published by the Institute of Korean Human Resources Development Strategy of Chung-Ang University (hereinafter referred to as "the Institute") of the Act.
Article 2 (Journal evaluation criteria) Journal evaluation is based on the following criteria. Each criterion is evaluated to be very excellent, excellent, moderate, insufficient, and very insufficient.
1. Clarity of research topic
2. Appropriateness of abstract writing
3. Fidelity of review of related literature and theoretical background
4. Feasibility of research method
5. Appropriateness and fidelity of data analysis and presentation of results
6. Systematicity of paper
7. Qualitative and originality of paper
8. Adequacy of the conclusion
9. Accuracy of citation and bibliography
10. Academic and field application contributions
Article 3 (Composition of judge committee) In order to enhance the responsibility and efficiency of the jury, among the scholars in and out of the university, the judging panel can be composed mainly of those who are excellent in the results of the paper and the quality of the journal and are active in the activities of the society.
Article 4 (Judgment of evaluation) The Committee shall judge whether or not the dissertation is published by incorporating the judgment of the judges.
1. The committee shall nominate three scholars who have published at least 300% of the theses in the field of related research for the past three years for each submitted thesis.
2. The judges shall determine the thesis in the following three steps and submit the results to the committee.
① Publication: Paper that was determined to be available without modification or the contents to be modified are limited to the expression, vocabulary selection, presentation order, etc.,
② Re-review after revision: Paper which is considered to be problematic in the core contents of the thesis
③ Impossible to publish: A paper that has a problem in the core contents of the paper and that it requires a considerable period of time to solve the problem
3. Based on the judgment of the judges of 3 persons, a comprehensive judgment on whether or not to be published shall be made as follows.
4. The committee's decision may be decided by voting via the Internet e-mail.
5. The thesis that has been judged as "revised after revision" in the comprehensive judgment should be submitted again after faithfully fulfilling the revision requirement of the judge. The thesis that has been judged to be "published" should also be faithfully fulfilled if there is a revision request of the judge.
6. After the revision is resubmitted, the editorial committee will review the paper and determine whether it will be published.
7. Papers which have been judged to be "postponement of publication" according to the General Synopsis can not be published in the relevant issue, and may be re-submitted to the next issue as modified articles.
8. According to the result of comprehensive judgment and re-examination, a thesis which has been judged as "not possible to submit" can not be reapplied.
Article 6 (Other) The details not specified in this regulation shall be decided by the Institute.