Advisor Guide
As an advisor (teacher), you have the final say on paper acceptance and publication. You ensure quality control and mentor students through the research process.
What You Can Do
Advisors have all club lead capabilities plus exclusive decision-making authority:
Accept Papers
Approve papers for publication
Reject Papers
Decline papers that don't meet standards
Publish Papers
Make accepted papers publicly available
Request Revisions
Ask for another round of improvements
Review Papers
Claim and review papers like club leads
Manage Roles
Promote members to club lead status
Key Responsibility: Only advisors can make final accept/reject decisions. This ensures teacher oversight on all published content.
Decision Workflow
Monitor the Decisions Page
The Decisions page shows papers that have completed peer review and are ready for your decision. Both reviewers must have submitted their reviews.
Tips:
- •Check this page regularly
- •Papers are sorted by submission date
- •You can see review summaries at a glance
Review All Feedback
Read both reviewer recommendations and comments. Consider the paper's strengths, weaknesses, and how well the author addressed feedback in revisions.
Tips:
- •Read the full reviews, not just recommendations
- •Note if reviewers agree or disagree
- •For revisions, check the author's revision summary
Make Your Decision
Choose one of three actions: Accept (paper is ready), Request Revision (needs more work), or Reject (not suitable). Add decision notes if helpful.
Tips:
- •Decision notes are visible to the author
- •Be clear about why you made your decision
- •Consider if concerns are addressable via revision
Publish Accepted Papers
After accepting a paper, you can publish it to make it visible on the Research page. Publishing is a separate action from accepting.
Tips:
- •Published papers are visible to everyone
- •You can delay publishing if needed
- •Published papers build students' portfolios
Decision Guidelines
Accept
Use when the paper meets quality standards and is ready for publication.
Criteria:
- •Paper addresses a clear research question
- •Methodology is sound and appropriate
- •Conclusions are supported by evidence
- •Writing is clear and well-organized
- •Citations are properly formatted
Request Revision
Use when the paper needs more work but could be publishable after changes.
Criteria:
- •Paper has potential but needs improvements
- •Issues are fixable with reasonable effort
- •Author hasn't exceeded 3 revision rounds
- •Reviewers identified specific areas to address
Reject
Use sparingly. Always provide constructive feedback for improvement.
Criteria:
- •Fundamental issues that can't be fixed via revision
- •Topic is outside scope of the club
- •Plagiarism or ethical concerns
- •Author has exhausted revision rounds
Understanding Revision Rounds
Authors can revise their papers up to 3 times. Here's how the system works:
First revision after initial feedback. Most papers need at least one round.
Second revision for papers that still need work. Common for complex topics.
Final opportunity. After this, you must accept or reject the paper.
Note: Track revision rounds carefully. After Round 3, you cannot request more revisions.
Quality Standards
When evaluating papers, consider these areas:
Research Question
- •Is the topic clear and focused?
- •Is it appropriate for high school research?
- •Does it contribute something meaningful?
Methodology
- •Is the approach appropriate for the question?
- •Are methods clearly described?
- •Are limitations acknowledged?
Evidence & Analysis
- •Is evidence presented clearly?
- •Is analysis logical and sound?
- •Are conclusions supported?
Writing & Presentation
- •Is the writing clear and organized?
- •Is academic tone maintained?
- •Are citations properly formatted?
Permission Matrix
Quick reference for what each role can do:
| Action | Member | Club Lead | Advisor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Submit papers | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| View own submissions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| View all submissions | - | ✓ | ✓ |
| Claim papers to review | - | ✓ | ✓ |
| Submit reviews | - | ✓ | ✓ |
| Request revisions | - | ✓ | ✓ |
| Accept papers | - | - | ✓ |
| Reject papers | - | - | ✓ |
| Publish papers | - | - | ✓ |
| Manage events | - | ✓ | ✓ |
| Manage competitions | - | ✓ | ✓ |
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I override reviewer recommendations?
Yes. You make the final decision. Consider reviewer input, but use your judgment. Document your reasoning in decision notes.
What if reviewers strongly disagree?
Carefully review both perspectives. You may want to read the paper yourself. Your decision should balance both viewpoints.
Should I review papers myself or just make decisions?
Both are appropriate. For papers where reviewer feedback is sufficient, you can decide based on reviews. For borderline cases, reviewing yourself is valuable.
How do I promote someone to club lead?
This feature is managed through the database. Contact the system administrator to change user roles.