Eight venues, compared on the four things that actually differ: what it costs, how many reviewers see your paper, how long it takes, and whether literature reviews are accepted. Three are free. Three sell expedited review. Only one refuses to be hurried with money. Two have submission windows rather than rolling review, and one of those opens on 1 November.
Every list of student journals is a list. This is a comparison, which is a different thing — the venues differ on four axes and most guides mention none of them.
All figures checked in October 2026 against each journal's own pages.
The comparison
| Journal | At submission | On acceptance | Fast track | Reviewers stated | Timeline | Takes reviews? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal of Emerging Investigators | $49 | — | Refused | 8+ touch each paper | Not published | No |
| NHSJS | Free | — | $280 | One or two, plus board | 8 wks median, 95% ≤14 | Yes |
| Columbia Junior Science Journal | None advertised | None advertised | None | Not stated | Elimination rounds, Oct–Dec | Yes |
| Young Scientist Journal (Vanderbilt) | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | None | Not stated | ~6 months, two rounds | No |
| Oxford Journal of Student Scholarship | Not stated | Not stated | None found | Not stated | Not stated | Yes |
| Journal of Student Research | $50 | $299 | $300 + fee | Not stated | 12–24 weeks | Limited |
| Curieux Academic Journal | — | — | — | Two in-house editors | — | Closed |
The four things that actually differ
1. When the fee is charged
This matters more than the amount.
A fee charged at submission is a screening cost. You pay it whether or not you are accepted, so the journal earns nothing by saying yes. JEI's $49 works this way.
A fee charged on acceptance creates the opposite incentive: the journal only earns when it publishes you. Curieux charged $200–$250 on acceptance before it closed. JSR charges both — $50 to submit and $299 on decision.
A single-authored JSR paper that buys the fast track comes to roughly $650 before the service fee. That is more than the Oxford Scholar Programme costs per contact hour, which is a strange comparison to be able to make.
2. Whether speed is for sale
Three of these venues sell expedited review. One refuses outright.
The joint COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME principles state at Principle 13:
"Author fees or waiver status should not influence editorial decision making."
A paid option that changes how quickly — and unavoidably, by whom and how thoroughly — a paper is assessed sits close to that line. JEI states it will not expedite "for any reason," and that single sentence is the strongest quality signal available in this category, because it is the one thing money cannot move.
The practical consequence for you: an admissions reader or interviewer who knows this sector knows which journals sell speed. Buying it saves three months and costs you the thing you were buying.
3. How many people read your paper
The number separates a journal from a publishing service.
Think.Check.Submit. tells authors to establish "independent/external reviewers, how many reviewers per paper." The DOAJ requires at least two independent reviewers for inclusion.
JEI states more than eight individuals are involved across its pipeline. NHSJS says manuscripts that clear screening go to "one or two qualified peer reviewers" plus a Scientist Advisory Board member — honest, and the one is below the DOAJ floor. Several of the others publish no number at all.
Curieux, before it closed, used two of its own editors checking for "academic integrity, factual certitude, and grammatical correctness." That is copy-editing and plausibility checking rather than subject peer review by independent experts, and the candour of the description was the useful part.
4. Whether a literature review has a home
The single commonest avoidable rejection.
Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal states it plainly: "Original research only, no review articles will be accepted." JEI wants a finding — new measurements, a novel analysis, an experiment you ran.
If your project synthesises what others have found, it may be excellent and it has no home at either. NHSJS, CJSJ and OJSS all accept reviews. Knowing that before you write saves a cycle.
The calendar
Two of these are not rolling, and if you miss the window you wait a year.
| Venue | Window | Publication |
|---|---|---|
| Young Scientist Journal | 1 November – 1 December | May, ~6 months after submission |
| Columbia Junior Science Journal | Roughly June – September | Following March |
| Everything else | Rolling | Varies |
The Young Scientist window opens shortly. If you have finished original science, that is the nearest real deadline.
What about indexing and DOIs?
Treat indexing claims with suspicion and DOI claims as the useful signal.
A DOI is a permanent identifier that lets you cite your own paper years later. JEI assigns them. JSR assigns them through Crossref under prefix 10.47611, which we verified on a live article. OJSS displays a DOI prefix in its footer. NHSJS and CJSJ make no DOI claim.
Indexing is where the misleading claims live. Google Scholar, OpenAIRE and similar harvesters index broad swathes of the open web and inclusion implies no quality screening whatsoever. Iowa State's guidance on predatory publishing lists false indexing claims among the warning signs. JEI states flatly that "JEI articles are not indexed" — candour that is worth more than a long list of harvesters.
One caution about a test you will meet: some university guidance suggests treating any journal without an Impact Factor as suspect. Applied to student journals, that condemns all of them including the good ones. It is not a useful screen here.
What changed since most guides were written
Two things, and almost nothing published reflects either.
Curieux has closed to new submissions. It still appears on most "where can high schoolers publish" lists. Those lists are wrong.
NHSJS now publishes real review timings — 8 weeks median, 95% within 14 — which is the only measured timeline in the category and makes planning backwards from a deadline possible for the first time.
The general hazard: venues change faster than the guides do, and the guides are largely copied from each other. Before you prepare anything, load the journal's own submissions page and read the date on it.
Choosing, in one paragraph
If you have original science and a little money, JEI, because nobody can buy an advantage over you there. If you have original science and no money, NHSJS or Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal, both free and both real. If you have a literature review, NHSJS, CJSJ or OJSS, which are the three that take them. If your deadline is in five weeks, none of them — submit next cycle and describe the work as in progress, which is an ordinary thing for a researcher to say.
Our complete guide to publishing covers the route from finished draft to decision, and what happens after you submit covers the months in between.
Where we fit
The Oxford Centre for Advanced Research runs 1:1 mentorships with PhD candidates and early-career researchers at Oxford, Cambridge, other leading UK universities and Ivy League institutions. The Oxford Publication Fellowship is £3,400, roughly $4,400, and is built around getting a project to submission standard.
We submit to the Oxford Journal of Student Scholarship, the Journal of Research High School and Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal, through standard review. Two of those appear in the table above, and we have reviewed OJSS on the same terms as everyone else here — including the parts that do not flatter it. All three reject student work, ours included.
We do not use paid expediting anywhere, and a student with a finished paper and no budget should submit to a free venue before paying us or anyone.
The question that sorts them
Ask any journal when it last rejected a paper like yours.
A venue that can answer specifically is reviewing. One that cannot is processing. Every other consideration — fees, speed, indexing, prestige in the name — follows from that answer.
Frequently asked questions
Which journal should I submit to?
Original science with data: the Journal of Emerging Investigators, which cannot be hurried with money. No budget: NHSJS or the Columbia Junior Science Journal, both free. A literature review: NHSJS, CJSJ or the Oxford Journal of Student Scholarship, which are the ones that take them. Original science and you want a university-run venue: Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal.
Which ones are free?
NHSJS is free for standard submission. The Columbia Junior Science Journal advertises no fee. Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal mentions none on its submission pages. JEI charges $49 at submission with nothing afterwards, which is the next best structure because the fee screens rather than rewards acceptance.
Which take literature reviews?
NHSJS, the Columbia Junior Science Journal and the Oxford Journal of Student Scholarship. JEI and Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal do not — YSJ states plainly 'Original research only, no review articles will be accepted.' Sending a review to a venue that does not take them is the commonest avoidable rejection.
Do any have deadlines rather than rolling review?
Two. The Columbia Junior Science Journal runs roughly June to September and publishes in March. Vanderbilt's Young Scientist Journal has a submission window of 1 November to 1 December, with publication in May — about six months end to end.
Which ones sell faster review?
NHSJS at $280, the Journal of Student Research at $300 plus a service fee, and Curieux did at $250 before it closed. JEI refuses to expedite 'for any reason', which is the single strongest quality signal in the category.
How many reviewers should a journal use?
The DOAJ sets at least two independent reviewers as its floor for inclusion. JEI says more than eight people touch a paper. NHSJS says 'one or two' plus an advisory board member. Several publish no number at all, which Think.Check.Submit. treats as a question you should be able to answer before submitting.