Scholarly communities in computing determine how to produce and validate knowledge within their domains of focus. Much of this knowledge can remain tacit because of shared ways of becoming a disciplinary scholar within any particular area of computing. But such tacitness presents challenges for computing education scholarship, since knowledge about how to create and validate claims about human thinking and learning is rarely a part of the training for computing educators. The editors-in-chief of TOCE have responded to these challenges by making explicit the epistemic practices associated with the publication of its manuscripts, by encouraging a range of borrowing from other disciplines, and by instituting feedback loops at all levels of review.