Getting the Most Out of the Marymount University Newspaper
Most students I work with approach the Marymount University Newspaper the wrong way from the start. They treat it like a passive consumption channel, something to skim between classes. That is a waste. The publication has been around long enough that the bylines, the editorial standards, and the submission rhythms are fairly predictable once you actually pay attention. I spent years helping student writers navigate publication pipelines at regional universities, and Arlington has its own quirks. The Mount's editorial staff rotates every spring, which means style guides shift slightly from year to year. If you are submitting an op-ed or a feature pitch, assume the current senior editor will want you to align with whatever template was last circulated, not the one on the archived website.
How the Marymount University Newspaper operates behind the scenes
The publication runs on a biweekly print cycle with a digital-first component. Stories are assigned during editorial board meetings that typically happen on Wednesday afternoons in the communications department. If you are not a member of the staff, you can still contribute through open calls for submissions, but those windows are narrow. Most contributors miss the deadline because they do not realize the submission portal closes 72 hours before print goes to press. Here is the practical workflow. Draft your piece to roughly 800 words. Trim any adverb that does not carry weight. Run it through the school's style checker if one exists, otherwise use a standard AP style reference. Submit via the designated Google Form or editorial inbox—whichever the current advertising board posts on their social channels. Wait four business days for a response. If you do not hear back, send one follow-up email. Do not escalate beyond that. I learned this the hard way during my second year of assisting with campus journalism. I drafted a 1,200-word investigative piece about parking lot access near the main quad. I submitted it on a Tuesday with no response. I emailed again Thursday morning. By Friday, the editors informed me the story had been auto-deleted because it exceeded the character limit in their CMS. I had not read the guidelines carefully. That was my mistake. I started clipping submission confirmations and screenshotting guideline pages for future reference. It saved me from repeating that error.
What actually gets published and what gets filtered out
The editorial board prioritizes three categories: campus policy changes, student advocacy stories with verifiable data, and event coverage that fills a gap in the academic calendar. Op-eds about generic wellness tips or unverified complaints tend to get desk-rejected without detailed feedback. The staff does not have the bandwidth to coach every submitter. If you want your piece to pass review, anchor it in a specific incident or policy change. Name the office responsible. Cite a date. Provide a link to the source document if possible. This is basic journalistic work, but the rejection rate for vague pitches is roughly 60 percent based on what I have observed. One counter-intuitive insight that nobody tells students: a shorter, well-sourced story will almost always beat a longer, poorly sourced one. The editors have told me this repeatedly. A 600-word piece with three direct quotes and one primary document attached will move through copy editing faster than a 1,500-word narrative that relies on anonymous hallway conversations.
Get the Full Details
Common mistakes that stall your submission
Students frequently attach files instead of pasting text directly into the form field. The editorial workflow uses a plain text pipeline, and every file attachment requires manual transcription. This adds two to three days to your turnaround. Another frequent issue is using informal salutations like "Hey team" in professional submissions. The editors treat these as amateur signals. Start with "Dear Editor" or address the specific editor by name if you know who it is. Writing style matters more than length, but word choice can create problems. Avoid slang, abbreviations like "idk" or "tbh," and anything that reads like a text message. Use complete sentences. Run your draft through a grammar tool if you need to, but do not rely on it entirely. These tools miss context-dependent errors that editors catch instantly.
What the publication cannot do for you
The Marymount University Newspaper will not fact-check external claims on your behalf. If you reference a statistic from a government report, a university study, or a news outlet, you are responsible for verifying it. The editors will flag obvious discrepancies, but they do not run background investigations on outside sources. If you submit something that turns out to be inaccurate, it will be pulled and your future submissions may face heavier scrutiny. The publication also does not serve as a complaint mechanism for individual grievances. Stories about personal disputes with roommates, dining hall complaints, or one-off incidents involving staff generally do not meet the threshold for publication. These belong in administrative offices or student advocacy channels, not in the newspaper.
Alternatives if your pitch does not fit
If your story is too narrow or too personal for the main print edition, consider the digital-only columns. The university maintains a few online feature spaces that are less restrictive. Some student journalists use these as stepping stones before pitching the print. Others find the digital format better suited for data-driven analysis or long-form profiles that would never fit in the constrained print layout. Another option is the university's official communications social media channels. Short-form content with strong hooks performs well there, and editorial staff sometimes cross-post compelling pieces from student contributors. This is not ideal for in-depth work, but it builds visibility and demonstrates reliability to the print editors.
Building a sustainable contribution habit
Consistency matters more than volume. Submit one solid piece per semester rather than three rushed ones per month. Editors remember contributors who deliver reliable, well-formatted work. They also remember the ones who ignore feedback and resubmit the same flawed draft. The difference between those two groups is small adjustments, not dramatic rewrites. Keep a running document of every submission you make. Note the date, the piece title, the editor response, and any revision requests. This becomes a personal tracking system that helps you identify patterns in what gets accepted and what does not. It took me about six months of logging this data to realize the board preferred timely pieces over evergreen content. Adjusting my strategy based on that insight improved my acceptance rate significantly.
