We acknowledge that we live and work on unceded Indigenous territories and we thank the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations for their hospitality.
Please submit your review online using OJS and the submission URL that was included in your invitation to review.
Peer review guidelines developed by Associate Editor Alexandrine Boudreault-Fournier
Textual components (max 1500-2000 words):
Should relate directly to the soundscape(s) / sound clip(s) submitted (forms may include: essays, poems, stories, etc.).
Essays must engage methodologically, theoretically (or in some other way) with sound studies: i.e. anthropology of sound, musicology, ethnomusicology, storytelling, communications and/or other approaches that address sound in all of its dimensions.
The overall project should engage with sonic expressions, phenomenon and/or explorations of sounds in / about / of British Columbia.
Sound Submissions (no length restrictions / limits):
A sonic/musical composition/recording: may be site-specific and /or related to a particular question, intention, creative process etc.
May be approached from various epistemological perspectives: activist; phenomenological; cultural, historical, artistic, political and /or ethical frameworks etc.
May be comprised of various forms: narrative and non-narrative voice, storytelling,collected and created sounds (environmental, urban), noises, etc.
Sound clips may be submitted in raw and/or processed form(s).
Soundworks: Guidelines for Peer Review
1. General Objectives:
Does the submission meet the criteria above?
Is the submission clearly connected to sonic expressions, phenomena and explorations in/about/of British Columbia?
How does this submission contribute to our understanding of British Columbia?
Does the submission engage with sound studies?
Is there a clear relationship between the written component and the sound piece?
2. Scholarship and methodology:
What conceptual and /or theoretical contribution does the submission make?
Does the submission engage with questions /problems / methodologies that are relevant to sound studies and to other disciplines that engage with sound?
Does the submitted sound work offer something that text alone cannot?
According to your own appreciation, is the sound clip appealing, did it stimulate your interest on the topic explored?
Do you have any ethical concerns about the use of the sound clip that are not addressed by the author(s) in some way?
4. General judgment
Do you have any suggestions for improving the project?
- amendments to the essays and/or the sound piece that will clarify or increase the value of the project?
- comments about the length of the sound piece, or the essay?
Please be as explicit as possible.
** Do you suspect any copyrights issues/problems with the use of the sound clip?
Will the project attract a broad readership / audience?
According to your best judgment, please advise if the manuscript (sound and text) should be:
a) Published as it stands
b) Published subject to satisfactory revision
c) Resubmitted for review
d) Returned as unsuitable for publication in BC studies