About the Journal
Publisher
The South African Theological Seminary
37 Grosvenor, Rd, Bryanston, Sandton, 2152
South Africa
Sources of Support
All issues of Conspectus are freely available for download from the SATS website and the Directory of Open Access Journals. The publication of the journal is fully funded by the South African Theological Seminary.
Publication Scheduling
Conspectus publishes twice a year.
Publication Fee
The publication of the journal is primarily funded by the South African Theological Seminary. A fee of 4500 ZAR is payable upon publication. This fee only applies to authors who are formally affiliated with a South African public university and hence benefit from the subsidy provided by the South African government. Publication fees do not apply to those with no such affiliations.
Review and Editorial Process
Conspectus subscribes to a double-blind peer review process. The Editorial Team commits to ensuring anonymity of both authors and reviewers. Each article is reviewed by three members of the review board[1] and reviewers are appointed based on expertise. The review process takes between 4 and 8 weeks.
The editorial process is divided into ten phases. Each phase describes the tasks specific to the phase, the person(s) responsible, and signals the phase to follow.
Phase 1: Article Submission
An article is submitted to the editors of Conspectus via email (conspectus@sats.ac.za). The deadlines for submissions are as follows:
- End of April for the October issue.
- End of October for the April issue.
Phase 2: Preliminary Evaluation
The editors conduct a preliminary assessment of the submissions before they are sent for double-blind peer review. Articles will only be considered if they are accompanied by the Author’s Agreement (See §6 in the Author Guidelines). If an article does not adhere to the requirements stated in the Author Guidelines or does not align with the theological scope, aims, or values of the journal, the editors reserve the right to send it back to the author for revision or to decline it. In such a case, the editors’ decision is final and need not be explained to the author(s).
Phase 3: Double-blind Peer Review
The editors send selected articles for double-blind peer review. Prior to sending the documents, the editors ensure the anonymity of authors by removing personal details and clearing author information from the Word document. The editors send referees the following:
- The article(s).
- The Conspectus author guidelines (Annexure A).
- The Conspectus Review Form (Annexure B).
Reviewers are given up to four weeks to return their reviews to the editors. Reviewers are asked to pay special attention to the following: title; abstract; major claim; methodology; argument; trends and sources; style and formatting; contribution; scriptural engagement; suitability.
Phase 4: Collating Reviews and Determining Outcomes
After receiving the three reviews, the editors, in consultation with the content editor, agree on the outcome. The comments from the review panel are converted into one master feedback document per article.[2] These documents are passed on to authors by the editors. The outcome can be one of the following: accepted; accepted with minor corrections; accepted with major corrections; resubmit; decline.
Should an author wish to appeal the outcome of a review, they are to contact the journal editor who will consider the case alongside the Editorial Team. Once the appeal has been processed, the decision made by the Editorial Team is final.
Phase 5: Feedback to Authors and Amendments
Upon receiving the documents, authors are given the opportunity to make all the necessary amendments. Using the feedback form, authors are expected to send a report outlining changes made and motivating those not adhered to upon submitting their revised articles. The revised article and report are then sent to the editors for another round of review. If the outcome was a resubmission, the article will be considered for the next volume. Once such an article has been revised, it is sent for review to the original reviewers and the process will repeat itself. The Editorial Team only allows one resubmission. If a resubmitted article is not accepted in the second round of reviews, it will be declined.
Phase 6: Internal Copy Editing
The revised articles are sent to the internal copy editor, who uploads it to SATS’s plagiarism software and liaises with the authors to ensure that the articles adhere to the Author Guidelines, SBL Handbook of Style (2014), and Chicago Manual of Style (2017). Once the copy editor is satisfied with an article it is typeset into the parent document by the proofreader.
Phase 7: Internal Editing of Parent Document
The editors and proofreader work together to edit the master copy to its final form before sending it to the external typesetter.
Phase 8: External Typesetting and Layout
The editors send the parent document to the external layout artist. During this phase, the layout artist will transfer the edited Word document onto the dedicated template for the issue, making necessary changes where appropriate. Once complete the new document is sent to the editors for review.
Phase 9: Final Checks
Upon receiving the typeset articles, the editors, copy editor, proofreader, and authors read through each article. The Editorial Team evaluates the work done by the layout artist and typesetter, noting mandatory changes and adjustments. The layout artist/typesetter incorporates the required changes into the document and sends the revised document back to the editors for approval.
Phase 10: Publication and Announcement (May/November)
Once the editor approves of the document, the media manager liaises with the content manager and webmaster concerning the publication of the issue on SATS’s platforms. The editors also communicate with the following parties:
- The editors congratulate authors on their publications. The editors attach the final articles and the complete issue to the congratulatory messages.
- SATS’s Management Team is informed.
- The Editorial Team is thanked for the successful publication of the issue.
- The Editorial Board is informed and thanked.
- SATS academics and friends of SATS are informed.
Plagiarism
The Conspectus Editorial Team considers plagiarism (whether intentional or unintentional) a serious offense. All articles are uploaded to plagiarism software during internal copy editing. If an author should be found guilty of plagiarism, the article will be immediately rejected or retrospectively removed if plagiarism is discovered at a later stage. Potential plagiarism will be investigated by the editor, associate editor, and copy editor, in conversation with the Academic Dean and Principal. Authors will be given an opportunity to explain irregularities before the outcomes are determined. All cases are evaluated along four levels of severity: accidental, isolated, significant, and pervasive.
If an author is found guilty of significant or pervasive plagiarism, if they are a repeat offender, or if they refuse a meeting with the Editorial Team, the editors reserve the right to inform the author’s superiors. In such a case, all responsibilities towards SATS will be immediately terminated and the author will be permanently banned from submitting articles and reviews to Conspectus.
If an author is found guilty of unintentional or isolated plagiarism, their article will be removed from the journal. However, they will be free to rewrite and resubmit it for review after a year. If an Editorial Board member is found guilty of plagiarism on any of the four levels of severity, their seat on the board will be suspended. In the case of unintentional or isolated plagiarism, the suspension can be temporary.
Archiving
Conspectus is currently catalogued under ATLA (EBSCOhost), Logos Bible Software, Galaxie.net, Sabinet, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), African Journals Online (AJOL), and the Seminary’s website (available here). All published content is uploaded to Portico for electronic archiving. Since January 2022, all articles and book reviews have been allocated a DOI issued by Crossref.
Corrections and Retractions
Once an article is published in the journal, copyright is transferred to SATS. Typological errors cannot be amended after publication, but major errors with ethical implications, such as plagiarism or theological error, will be reviewed upon request. If an article is retracted, a retraction note will be added to the published PDF.
Editorial Team
Description and Responsibilities
The journal is steered by an Editorial Team that meets once a month. The Editorial Team consists of the editor, associate editor, content editor, copy editor, proofreader and administrator, and book review editor(s).
The responsibilities of team members are outlined here below:
Editor
The editor is responsible for the Editorial Team, the journal’s research trajectory, and upholding the ethos of Conspectus. They communicate with the Editorial Board on behalf of the Editorial Team. The editor also reports to SATS’s Management Team on behalf of the Editorial Team and vice-versa. The editor and associate editor meet regularly to discuss Conspectus’s operations. The editor is also a member of Conspectus’s Editorial Board.
Associate Editor
The associate editor is responsible for the journal’s operations. This includes implementing procedures related to the editorial process and contributing to the journal’s research trajectory. The associate editor also chairs Editorial Team meetings, communicates with contributors and the Editorial Team, and evaluates the content of the journal. The associate editor is also a member of Conspectus’s Editorial Board.
Content Editor
The content editor is responsible for the quality of articles that are published in Conspectus. As a gatekeeper of standards, they have the authority to query the efficacy and viability of submissions approved by referees. The content editor also contributes to the journal’s operational ethos and serves as a member of Conspectus’s Editorial Board.
Copy Editor
The copy editor is responsible for Conspectus’s grammar and formatting. However, the role extends to other areas of the editorial process. As a gatekeeper of standards, they ensure that articles are free from plagiarism and have the authority to query the efficacy and viability of submissions approved by referees. The copy editor also evaluates journal content, contributes to the journal’s operational ethos, and serves on Conspectus’s Editorial Board.
Proofreader and Administrator
The proofreader and administrator is responsible for checking grammar and typesetting before an issue is published. They are responsible for setting the agenda and collating minutes and actions from the Editorial Team’s monthly meetings, as well as other administrative tasks delegated by the editor and associate aditor. As administrator, they also collate data metrics from the sites that the journal is indexed on.
Book Review Editor(s)
The book review editor is responsible for negotiating and maintaining agreements for free review copies with publishing houses, identifying relevant books for review, and collating and evaluating book reviews for publication. They also serve on Conspectus’s Editorial Board.
Editorial Board
Description and Responsibilities
The Editorial Board is an international group of scholars appointed by Conspectus’s editor in consultation with the SATS Management Team to provide accountability and professional input in the running of the journal. Potential board members are identified by the existing board and/or Editorial Team and invited to submit a CV, photograph, biography, and 3–4 articles for consideration by the Editorial Team in consultation with the SMT. It is not standard procedure for members of the public to apply for such a position; rather, potential members are invited by the journal editor.
At least two thirds of the Editorial Board consist of scholars with no formal affiliation to SATS. Editorial Board members do not review articles but fulfill an advisory role. The responsibilities of Editorial Board members include familiarizing themselves with the values, scope, and aims of the journal, doing a high-level reading of each volume (two per year), completing a short bi-annual report form, and availing themselves for two Editorial Board meetings a year.
The bi-annual report form includes
- feedback on the last edition,
- suggestions for upcoming editions, and
- suggestions for possible reviewers, Editorial Board members, authors, articles, and books to review.
All Editorial Board meetings are hosted online on a video-conferencing platform. These meetings are recorded, and minutes are archived by the associate editor. An Editorial Board chairperson is nominated by the Editorial Team and Editorial Board and appointed to the role for a two-year period (four journal issues). The elected chairperson is responsible for chairing the bi-annual meetings.
Review Board
Articles submitted to Conspectus undergo double-blind peer review, provided they pass the editors’ initial inspection. The journal has a board of reviewers who are responsible for reviewing articles across the spectrum of theological disciplines. Reviewers are enlisted to review articles within their areas of specialization. Review forms are supplied by the Editorial Team (see Annexure B). The board of reviewers has a two-thirds membership majority external to SATS and none of its members are permitted to serve on the Editorial Team or Editorial Board. To safeguard the integrity of the double-blind peer review process, the list of reviewers is not published in any of the journal’s policy documents.
Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement
By agreeing to serve on the Editorial Team, the Review Board, or the Editorial Board, one assents to the confidentiality and non-disclosure policy here described.
Terms of Agreement
The Editorial Team, Editorial Board Members, and Board of Referees undertake to treat as confidential and not to disclose to any person without the written authority from the editors, the following information:
- know-how, ideas, trade secrets, suppliers, customers, and trade connections;
- information pertaining to the management of Conspectus, contributors’ personal details, the names and personal details of the Board of Reviewers, and contributors’ unpublished research;
- any written information which is labelled “confidential” or “proprietary” before it is disclosed to the contributors; or
- any oral information, which is preceded by a statement that it is intended to be confidential and is later reduced in writing by the Editorial Team.
Should team members, board members, and reviewers be unsure whether certain information is confidential, they will be obliged to treat such information as confidential until the uncertainty is resolved. This agreement is specifically enforceable without proof of monetary damages and shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Republic of South Africa. The provisions of this agreement shall survive the termination of a contract or memorandum of understanding between Conspectus and members of the Editorial Team, Editorial Board, and Review Board. In the event that any portion of this agreement is held to be invalid for any reason, the remainder of this agreement will remain in full force and effect.
[1] The Review Board is an independent body, meaning that none of its members serve on the Conspectus Editorial Team or Editorial Board.
[2] Reviewers and editors do not work on the article using comments and track changes. Rather, a separate Word document is opened with changes indicated in the following format: “P. 24, par. 2, line 13: Add a period.”
[3] Editorial Office: 37 Grosvenor Road, Bryanston, Sandton, 2191
Contact Number: 011 022 4440
