Scholarship and Lore: Games for Learning Series

The Center for Learning Through Games and Simulations and Central Michigan University Press welcome submissions of pedagogical games for publication that fall within the framework of our core mission and values as part of our series on Scholarships and Lore: Games for Learning. 

To submit a game to the Scholarship and Lore: Games for Learning series, please include with your submission the following:

  1. A proposal identifying:
    • your contact details and professional affiliation(s); 
    • a brief description of your game (e.g., content focus, core mechanics, etc.); 
    • the game’s target audience (e.g., educational level, academic discipline, etc.);  
    • the learning objectives for the players;  
    • a justification for addressing these learning objectives via a game;  
    • a description of the ways in which the game is innovative; 
    • a summary of comparable games on this topic; 
    • a statement on why you believe that your game is suitable for publication by the press; and  
    • a list of three content experts you feel are most appropriate for evaluating your game.
  2. A playable prototype of the game complete with clearly-written rules (if the submission has specialized pieces or materials, please email the press editor to determine the best way to route these materials to the reviewers); and 
  3. Any pedagogical materials in support of the game (e.g., contextual class materials, lesson plans or assignments for use with the game, assessment rubrics, etc.). 

Please send your submissions by:

  • Email: (if electronic); or
  • Mail: Central Michigan University Press, 001 Anspach Hall, Central Michigan University, 1429 S. Washington St, Mount Pleasant, MI 48859 (for any physical materials).​
Submission Deadlines

The submission deadlines for press review are as follows:

  • January 31, for February Editorial Board Meeting
  • May 31, for June Editorial Board Meeting
  • September 30, for October Editorial Board Meeting
Series Editors
  • Tracy S. Davis, Central Michigan University
  • Andrew D. Devenney, Central Michigan University

Information for Peer Reviewers

Peer review is an essential component of both the editorial process and publication quality at Central Michigan University Press. A well-crafted review is also vital in helping authors and game designers as they revise their work.

The press uses a double-blind peer review process, meaning the identities of both the authors/designers and the peer reviewers are concealed from one another. All peer reviews are confidential and will not be used for any other purpose than to guide the editorial decisions of the press and improve the content of the game without the expressed written permission of the review author. All game submissions are the private, confidential property of the author/game designer, and reviewers should keep the submissions and their content strictly confidential.

Below are questions to guide reviewers for either type of review they may be asked to engage in.

Subject matter peer review questions
  • Is the content of this game free of errors?
  • Do the learning objectives and the subject matter content of the game align?
  • Are figures and data within the game necessary, legible, and helpful?
Game mechanics peer review questions
  • Are rules clear and detailed enough that you feel you could run the game?
  • Is the game engaging enough that even if you aren’t a content expert you would want to play it again?
  • After playing the game do you perceive that you have an increased awareness of the learning objectives?
  • Do the game mechanics reinforce the learning objectives?
  • If there is a win objective, is it clear and realistic? If there isn’t a win objective, does it make sense with the goals of the game?
  • In what ways is the game innovative?
  • Are there comparable games on this topic? If so, please identify them.

Your final review should contain: 1) an objective assessment of both the technical rigor and the novelty of the game; 2) a specific recommendation (Accept without Revision, Revise, or Reject); 3) a justification for your recommendation; and 4) a summary of the specific strengths and weaknesses of the game.

  • If your recommendation is to Reject the submission, please give a detailed explanation of your reasoning.
  • If your recommendation is to Revise the submission, please indicate whether it is a Major or Minor revision and furnish the author/designer with a clear, sound explanation of why this is necessary. Please also indicate to the editor whether you would be willing to review the revised game in the future.