All papers are subject to peer review. Manuscripts are reviewed by at least 3 external experts and editors. The Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media adopts a double-blind review, which means that the reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and vice versa.

Review Process

1) Editorial Board members receiving manuscripts from authors

The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal via an online system(journal.stemedia.co.kr). The manuscripts should be received two months before publication date.

Time for Publication: The Society of Teaching English through Media publishes four issues of the Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media per year. The submission due dates are as follows:

(1) Issue 1: December 31 (for February 28 publication)

(2) Issue 2: March 31 (for May 31 publication) - International Issue (English only)

(3) Issue 3: June 30 (for August 31 publication)

(4) Issue 4: September 30 (for November 30 publication) - International Issue (English only)

2) Appraisal by the Chair of the Editorial Board

The Chair of the Editorial Board checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further. The Chair of the Editorial Board assigns the submitted paper to the appropriate reviewers considering its specific area

3) Invitation to Reviewers

The Chair of the Editorial Board sends a form of ‘Request for Review’ to relevant reviewers with the ‘Manuscript Evaluation Form.’ In order to ensure fairness in reviewing and evaluating the manuscript, the author’s name, affiliation, and grant for research should be erased from it before being sent to reviewers. Also, when selecting a reviewer, reviewers from the same organization as the author should not be assigned. Each manuscript will be blind reviewed by at least three specialists with the authors’ name(s) and affiliation(s) removed.

4) Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the request against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline.

5) Review is Conducted

Each reviewer should review and evaluate the manuscript online(journal.stemedia.co.kr) according to the five criteria of 1) appropriateness, 2) originality, 3) logicality, 4) level of academic contribution, and 5) format.

Review Criteria

(1) Appropriateness of the Content: Topics and contents should be related to a theory of teaching English and its acquisition and practice in the classroom through using visual media such as movies, TV dramas, and games, various multimedia such as web-based contents, mobile apps, and educational appliances, graphic novels and comics. Any article from adjacent studies such as linguistics or literature should contain the educational and pedagogical implications for language learning and teaching through the media mentioned above.

(2) Creativity of the Content: Manuscripts that have been published or are being considered for publication elsewhere will not be considered. Manuscripts should offer a new, original insight or interpretation and not just a restatement of others’ ideas and views.

(3) Appropriateness of Organization and Development: Manuscripts should conform to the logical organization and development generally accepted in language studies.

(4) Academic Contribution: The contents of the article should contribute to the development of theories and applications of teaching English.

(5) Appropriateness of the Format and Style: Manuscripts should conform to the relevant format of the submission regulations suggested by the Society for Teaching English through Media.

6) Evaluation:

Each item will be graded on a scale of five points. Each reviewer sums up points from five items and gives a grade of ‘A (23-25 points)’, ‘B (20-22 points)’, ‘C (15-19 points)’, or ‘D (0-14 points)’. The grounds of evaluation will be specifically described in the form. If the manuscript needs to be revised, the reviewer provides explicit reasons in writing together with their advisory comments.

Grade	Evaluation
A (23-25 points)	Accepted for publication
A (23-25 points)	Accepted for publication with revision
C (15-19 points)	Re-evaluation after revision
D (0-14 points)	Reject

7) Report on Evaluation

Each reviewer fills out the ‘STEM Manuscript Evaluation Form’ and reports the result to the Chair of the Editorial Board. The reviewers should be well-informed of “Regulations for Research and Publication Ethics” of STEM. The reviewers judge any plagiarism in the assigned manuscript through checking the degree of similarity with other published articles. Reviewers suggest corrections with clear and detailed directions to the authors.

8) Editorial Board Meeting

Editorial Board meetings shall be convened by the Chair of the Editorial Board and the reviewer reports shall be gone over in Editorial Board meetings. If the manuscript is given a grade of 'B' or above from three reviewers, it is accepted for publication but If the manuscript is given a grade of 'D' from more than two reviewers, it is rejected for publication. If the results of the review differ from these cases, the Editorial Board shall discuss the matter and make the final decision as to the publication of the manuscript.

9) Notice of Evaluation Result

The Editorial Board sends the result of the evaluation to the corresponding author(s). The author(s) is/are expected to address all the comments raised by the reviewers, making appropriate corrections, or stating why the comments are unreasonable. The author(s) will then be informed by the Chair of the Editorial Board of the final decision on the publication of the manuscript.