revedres-workflow

• SKILL.mdcore · 7,787 bytes

# RER Workflow Router (revedres-workflow)

## Overview

This is the router. It tells you **which revedres-* skill to use at the current stage** of a **review article** aimed at the *Review of Educational Research* (RER) — the **American Educational Research Association's (AERA)** review journal of record, published by **SAGE** (founded 1931). RER publishes **comprehensive, critical, integrative reviews of research bearing on education** — systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and conceptual/critical syntheses — and **does not publish original empirical research** unless it is incorporated in a broader integrative review.

The decisive fact that shapes everything: **unlike Annual Reviews, RER reviews are SUBMITTED and peer-reviewed, not invited.** There is no commissioning editor handing you a slot. So the rigor of the **review itself** is the contribution — a documented systematic search and PRISMA flow, transparent inclusion/exclusion, reliable double-coding, defensible meta-analytic models (or a principled narrative synthesis), risk-of-bias and sensitivity analysis, and an **organizing framework that advances theory or policy** rather than tallying studies. The lifecycle is therefore: **scope a synthesis-worthy question → write and (where applicable) preregister a protocol → search and screen systematically to a PRISMA flow → impose a conceptual framework → demonstrate comprehensiveness, code reliably, and probe robustness → make transparency/reproducibility provable → write in RER's masked APA-7 voice → submit and revise.**

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as RER and the artefact as a **review** (systematic / meta-analytic / critical-integrative), not a primary-research paper. Operational tells that you are at RER and not a sibling: the work **synthesizes other people's studies** rather than reporting your own; the natural early step is a **protocol/PROSPERO registration**, not an IRB-approved data collection; there is **no identification strategy of your own** (you appraise the designs of the studies you include). If the user has original empirical results, they want *American Educational Research Journal* (AERJ) or *AERA Open*, not RER — say so.

## When to trigger

- The user asks "what should I do next?" on a review/meta-analysis
- A review draft reads like an annotated bibliography and needs an analytic spine