Universidad del Cauca

Formulario de búsqueda

2. Evaluation

Once received the work, the evaluation process begins.  Those proposals that do not meet a minimum quality of writing or have serious inconsistencies in its textual structure, legal problems, lack of articulation among Academic Publishing and mission, among other deficiencies will be discarded.

The publisher will not receive materials or incomplete texts, handwritten or illegible, works whose legal status is not defined, or works that had been rejected by the Editorial Committee be resubmitted without substantial modifications.

For books, the manuscripts should be no less than fifty (50) pages written in font Times, size 12, single spaced or its equivalent.

For evaluation purposes, the following definitions of the types of works are taken into account:

Scientific journals: are specialized serials in which scientific papers from different areas of knowledge, aimed at a specific audience are published. The information in scientific journals should be originated by the author and supported by other studies (references). The purpose of such publication is to communicate research work  and its results clearly and concisely.

In these journals papers, essays and articles are published; in other words, complete and autonomous items that have their own theme, whether scientific, technical, artistic, humanistic or teaching in order to meet the requirements of academic quality of indexed scientific journals in the national and international level.

Within this scientific category, there are also reviewed articles, which contain studies made by the author to give an overview of the status of a matter and its changes over a period. Also, in these items the prospects for its future development and evaluation are reviewed, and in them there is an extensive bibliographic review.

Books from research work: according to the Policy Research at the University of Cauca, these are the texts produced by the investigations conducted by the members of the different academic units of the University through their projects, lines or research programs.

These research texts correspond to possible solutions responding to many problems that face our society, and allow the University to be a valid interlocutor for national and international scientific community versus what happens around them. Within these books, important undergraduate and graduate thesis that have been reworked for publication may be included.

The evaluation of these texts for publication is made according to institutional guidelines that include aspects such as academic, social, economic and financial impact. It should be noted that evaluation for publication differs from the research evaluation.

Features:

a) Complete development of a theme, you must ensure the unity of the work.

b) Adequate theoretical foundation regarding the subject.

c) Methodological treatment of the subject according to academic and scientific productions.

d) Contributions and personal reflection of researchers.

e) Relevance and quality of sources and literature used.

f) Unprecedented nature of the work.

Textbooks: these books have an educational purpose, may include the contents of a University course given its didactic feature, and serve to strengthen the teaching, so should be didactic.

Features:

a) Orientation towards the teaching and learning process.

b) Complete development of the item at the corresponding level.

c) Update the content.

d) Didactic character.

e) Contributions from the author.

Books of essays: these books include the intellectual production of the university community as a result of concerns of his academic work and are targeted to a specific audience.

Within these books we include: Undergraduate and Graduate Thesis highlighted for their importance and that have been reworked for publication and documents of general interest presented by professors or researchers from different academic units of the University.

Features:

a) Complete development of a theme.

b) Adequate theoretical foundation regarding the subject.

c) Treatment methodological of subjects according to books of this nature.

d) Contributions and personal reflection of the author.

Preliminary reports from research: these are short papers that present preliminary results of research projects in particular domains of knowledge. With the publication of these documents you try to set precedents on intellectual priority.

Features:

a) Development of a theme, based on the presentation of research results.

b) Theoretical foundations regarding the subject.

c) Methodological Treatment of the theme of texts of this nature.

d) Contributions and personal reflection of the author.

f) Relevance and quality of sources and literature used.

Technology-supported courses: These courses have an educational purpose in developing the contents of a University course in undergraduate, graduate or continuing education. They are the basis to support teaching and learning, and therefore, must be presented in a didactic way and obey pedagogical intentions.

These courses may include, among others:

a) Complete development of the subject at the corresponding level with a suggested sequence.

b) Tutorials.

c) Citation of its objectives.

d) Updated content and references to find deeper information and consultation.

e) Statement of the development of relevant learning activities.

f) Presentation of ways of evaluation and self-assessment in line with the learning objectives proposed.

g) Structure and development of new material.

h) Contributions of the author.

i) Mechanisms that promote collaborative learning and meta-cognitive development.

j) Compliance with international standards and norms set by the University, to ensure reuse and interoperability.

The works proposed for publication will be evaluated also under the following parameters and based on the following concepts:

Publishing evaluation: its purpose is to determine the adequacy of the work to the plan of titles, the mission of the Press, the proposed publication textual genre and audience they are trying to reach in terms of structure, articulating the content, quality of writing, writing and legal conditions.

It will also include basic information on costs, financial assessment, market for the work, financial cost of the publication or project environment opportunity, competition in the book market, terms of promotion, distribution and marketing feasibility. The editorial review will be conducted by the editor, who may ask for this information necessary to the author or proponent of publication.

Academic and/or literary and artistic quality assessment: This evaluation seeks to qualify the contribution of artistic, literary, scholarly or scientific, conservation, transmission, expansion and renovation of knowledge or cultural heritage work.

The Evaluators give their views on the contribution of the work regarding to conceptual art, critical, argumentative, educational, creative or genre of writing, publishing and its relevance to the community to which it applies.

Two academic assessments, literary and/or and artistic quality, will be collected by external experts in the matter.

If there is some kind of discrepancy not resolvable based on the most detailed analysis and assessments available, or on occasions when further illustration of a text or a project evaluated are required, the Editorial Committee would ask for a third assessment and/or commission to any of its expert members to examine directly the material of the work to deliver a decision in a short time.

Reviewers: for the processes of assessment and management of titles, the Editorial Committee shall develop a database of evaluators and external consultants to the university of recognized competence, experience and expertise in their respective area. Evaluators were not given to know the name of the author or authors of the work, nor they from theirs ('double-blind' system).

Exceptions: The Editorial Committee can exempt one of the requirement of othe two academic assessments and proceed to make a decision, among others, for the following cases:

1. There are difficulties in collecting the second assessment that prevent the Committee to respond within the time limits set out in this regulation.

2. Especial quality conditions are found in the work, for example, positive, strong, comprehensive and detailed assessment of the available positive match or editorial diagnosis and other assessments available.

3. The publication has a significant value opportunity.

4. The work has been previously published

5. The exception has been proposed to the Editorial Committee and consensus was achieved.

Recommended or rewarded Works: The recommendation to publish works by academic or administrative units of the university or institutional awards organizers will not influence the Editorial Committee.

Recommended works must be submitted to the Editorial Committee, they shall follow the process under this regulation and its eventual approval does not imply the credit granting to institutional proponents or the organizers of such events.

Information of Assessment to proponents: as a result of the evaluations, the Editorial Committee will decide whether to approve or reject the publication of the work and disclose in writing to the proposer the resolution with the decision.

The decisions of the Editorial Committee shall be informed by the Secretary sending an email to the proponent indicating in the record of receipt.

The Editorial Committee shall establish special cases in which it is appropriate to inform the proponent about the rejected formats filled out by peers in academic evaluation of it. In all cases the anonymity of the evaluators will be maintained.

Changes to the work requested by the Editorial Committee: where for a selected work, the Editorial Committee has explicitly requested compliance with legal requirements and/or modification of content, form or structure based on the academic and publishing assessments, the proponent must make requested adjustments and adapt the work to the standards of the  University of Cauca Press in the previously agreed time. Otherwise, it will terminate the process without any requirement.

Deadlines for the information of the results of the evaluation process: the Editorial Committee shall give the applicant written answer on the results of deliberation and final decision within a period of six (6) months from the date of the acknowledgment of receipt of the work.

Reconsideration: the proponent may request the Editorial Committee to reconsider its decision. The request must be in writing and shall be reasoned.  The request must also be submitted within ten (10) business days following the date of dispatch from the Secretary.

The application will be considered at the next meeting scheduled in the annual calendar of the Editorial Committee and the new decision, informed the applicant within ten (10) business days following the meeting.

After the evaluation process, if this is favorable, the Preparation Editorial process starts.  It comprising all aspects needed to transform the evaluated manuscript and approved in a book, such as: editing, design and layout standardization, read proofing and printing. For courses with technological support, additional procedures for this type of publication including instructional design upstream and downstream stages of standardization and implementation shall apply.