From review-of-educational-research-skills
Guides researchers in deciding whether a topic warrants an RER review by testing fit, maturity, need, and scope.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/review-of-educational-research-skills:revedres-topic-selectionThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- You have a candidate review topic and need to know if it clears the RER bar
RER publishes comprehensive, critical, integrative reviews — not original empirical research, and not narrow stock-takes. Before investing months in a search, run the topic through four gates.
The fit tests also tell you which RER review type fits — and the type drives every later skill.
| If the question is… | The review type is… | The contribution lives in… |
|---|---|---|
| "What is the average effect of X on Y, and what moderates it?" | meta-analysis | pooled effect + moderator/heterogeneity story |
| "What does the body of evidence on X establish, by what designs?" | systematic review (PRISMA, narrative/qualitative synthesis) | the documented, reliable map of evidence |
| "How should we think about X — what framework reorganizes the field?" | critical / conceptual / integrative synthesis | the organizing framework itself |
Most strong RER pieces are explicit about type and hold to its standards; mixing a hand-picked narrative with a "meta-analysis" label invites rejection.
Because RER is the field's review-of-record, an editor's first instinct is "has this been reviewed already?" A topic survives only if you can name the nearest recent review (in RER or elsewhere) and say precisely how yours differs. Strong differentiators:
If you cannot articulate the differentiator in one sentence, the topic is not yet an RER review — it is a literature you have read, not a synthesis the field needs.
【Topic】<one-sentence review question>
【Importance】<why it matters to education broadly>
【Maturity】<size/shape of the primary literature; enough to integrate? Y/N>
【Why now】<growth / method shift / conflict / policy / missing frame>
【Scope】<population × constructs × designs × dates × settings — searchable to saturation? Y/N>
【Review type】meta-analysis | systematic review | critical-integrative synthesis
【Distinct from prior reviews】<the nearest recent review and how this differs>
【Next step】→ revedres-proposal-and-commissioning (write/preregister the protocol)
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin review-of-educational-research-skillsDirects users to the correct revedres-* sub-skill when sequencing systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or integrative syntheses for Review of Educational Research manuscripts.
Tests whether a research question fits Psychological Bulletin and selects the appropriate synthesis type (meta-analysis, systematic review, meta-review, qualitative review).
Evaluates whether a management/organization literature qualifies as an Academy of Management Annals-scale review topic using five fit tests (maturity, importance, fragmentation, integrability, tractable scope).