How a graduate school cut record review delays with cleaner submission queues
Graduate School
A graduate school managing hundreds of thesis submissions reduced review cycle time by restructuring their submission queue workflow inside Inrep Scholar.
The graduate school was managing thesis and project submissions through a combination of email threads and a shared spreadsheet. Reviewers had no structured queue; submissions arrived without consistent metadata, and the library team spent significant time chasing corrections.
After moving to Inrep Scholar, the team configured structured submission forms with mandatory metadata fields, set up a librarian review queue with inline correction requests, and connected publication decisions to the audit trail. Reviewers knew exactly which records were waiting, which were under correction, and which were ready to publish.
Within the first semester, review cycle times dropped and the library team reported fewer follow-up emails per submission. The graduate school now uses the platform to generate semester-end publication evidence for accreditation.
Key outcomes
- Shorter review cycle — fewer records stuck awaiting corrections
- Structured metadata on every submission before it reaches the queue
- Audit trail used directly in accreditation reporting