•  
  •  
 

Editors

Senior Editors

Kelly Taylor
Jordan Robbins

Junior Editors

Tyler Coker
Anya Nguyenkhoa

Sophomore Editor

Luke Schamber
Matthew Chin

General Editors

Piper Hanson
Julianne Martin
Mel Brisky
Carissa Chinnery
Amala Rajagopal
Rachel Gregoire
Kaitlyn Pasillas
Abigail Stephens
Hazel Hamilton
Raquel Kelley
Doris Liss
Sebastian Schwarz
Susan Sirrs

Editorial Board

  1. The Editorial Board will consist of six people:
    1. Two Senior Editors
    2. Two Junior Editors
    3. Two Sophomore Editors
  2. Senior Editors
    1. Must be members of Phi Alpha Theta (PAT)
    2. Must be in their senior year, and have been Junior Editor the previous year
    3. Primarily responsible for the organization and running of the journal
    4. Primary contact with faculty advisor
    5. Oversee Editorial Board throughout the process of editing and publication
    6. Make the final call on paper selection at both the editing and publication stages
    7. Responsible for organizing the editing process, including forming editing groups and creating an editing timeline
    8. Serve as Group Editors, i.e. be responsible for evaluating papers for editing, leading editing group(s), and evaluating the revisions made to the papers they are responsible for
    9. Responsible for publication, including:
      1. Uploading papers to the journal website
      2. Ensuring that publication fulfills all requirements to be eligible for the PAT Nash Journal Prize
    10. Primarily responsible for website maintenance
      1. Will receive Digital Commons training through the Leatherby Library
    11. Initiates and implements changes in journal policy
  3. Junior Editors
    1. Must be members of PAT
    2. Must be in their junior year
    3. Will become Senior Editors the year after they are Junior Editors
    4. Will be consulted when Senior Editors cannot agree on which papers will be considered at the editing and/or publication stage
    5. Under the leadership of the Senior Editors, serve as Group Leaders, i.e. be responsible for evaluating papers for editing, leading editing group(s), and evaluating the revisions made to the papers they are responsible for
  4. Sophomore Editors
    1. Must be in their sophomore year.
    2. Under the leadership of the Senior Editors, serve as Group Leaders, i.e. be responsible for evaluating papers for editing, leading editing group(s), and evaluating the revisions made to the papers they are responsible for

Faculty Advisor

  1. Selects Junior Editors and (when necessary) Sophomore Editors, in consultation with Senior Editors
  2. Recruits Student Editors
  3. Advises on policy changes and approves them
  4. Advises on any issues that come up in the process of editing and running the journal

Student Editors

  1. The Senior Editors will contact Student Editors and determine who among them are willing to be editors.
  2. The Senior Editors will group the student editors into groups of three students each, to be led by the members of the Editorial Board during the editing process.
  3. The Senior Editors will send an initial email to all student editors explaining the editing process and providing contact information for the Group Leaders.
    1. Following this email and during the editing process, student editors' communication will be almost exclusively with their Group Leader.
  4. There should be a sufficient number of editors that each student editor is obligated to edit only one paper.
  5. All students from Hist. 398 will be encouraged to participate as student editors (if they are not on the Editorial Board).
  6. Graduated seniors (whose papers are being considered for publication) may edit if they so choose, though they will not be obligated to do so.
    1. If seniors choose to participate in the editing process, they will not be assigned to edit their own paper.

Editing Process

  1. Papers from History 498/598 (and the Holocaust Studies seminar, if applicable) will be submitted by email to Voces Novae in the last week of the Spring semester.
  2. The papers will be divided evenly (if possible) among the six members of the Editorial Board. Each Board member will read all of their assigned papers and rank them in terms of their potential for publication by a date specified by the Senior Editors.
    1. Based upon these rankings, the Senior Editors will decide which papers will be edited.
      1. Senior Editors are encouraged to skim the papers they are not assigned in order to better inform their decision.
    2. Senior Editors will contact all papers' authors by email to inform them whether their paper will be edited or not.
  3. Editing:
    1. Each of the six members of the Editorial Board will be a Group Leader for one or more groups of three editors.
      1. Each group will edit one paper.
      2. Groups will be created by the Senior Editors in such a way as to ensure that no one (including the Senior Editors) is editing his or her own paper.
    2. Group Leaders will be responsible for editing their assigned paper and ensuring that all editors in their group edit their assigned paper by the specified date.
      1. All editing will be done through Google Docs; papers will be shared with editors in Suggesting mode (when sharing the document, choose "Can comment" in the drop-down menu next to the email bar)
        1. Edits will include both grammar and content.
        2. Edits can be in the form of comments on the paper or actual typing on the document, which will appear as Suggestions when the papers are returned to their authors.
        3. Nota bene: If Editorial Board members edit the papers in the Voces Novae Drive, they must ensure that they put the paper into Suggesting mode before editing
          1. At the top right corner, directly beneath the "Comments" button, click "Editing" to open the dropdown menu; select "Suggesting"; the box will turn green, with the word "Suggesting" in white.
    3. Each editor will evaluate the paper based on the Voces Novae Rubric, which they will fill out and return to their Group Leader.
      1. Rubrics will remain anonymous.
      2. Rubrics will be sent as a Word document to ensure that each editor creates his or her own version of the rubric.
      3. Group Leaders will collect these rubrics and forward them, with the edited paper, to the paper's author.
        1. Rubrics will also be deposited in the Voces Novae Drive for Senior Editors to review.
    4. The paper's author will be given the opportunity to revise their paper based on the suggestions of the editors.
    5. Revised papers will be returned to Group Leaders on the specified date.
      1. Group Leaders will evaluate the revisions and provide a suggestion to Senior Editors on whether the revised paper should be published.
    6. Senior Editors will decide which papers will be published, and will be responsible for uploading them to the Voces Novae website, as well as for gathering and uploading any additional information, including Author Bios, that is required to be eligible for the Nash Journal Prize.

Revised June 2021