The traditional publication process for scientific work is to design, conduct, analyse and write-up the study before submitting to any kind of peer review. However, some issues with studies can only be fixed at the design stage. Therefore some reviewer comments (and rejections) reveal a huge waste of time: the authors cannot fix the issue without re-designing and re-running the study, so their time is wasted, the participant time was wasted, and the reviewer’s time was also wasted. Registered Reports are a new way to publish where the peer review is done after the design stage, before the study is conducted. This allows issues to be corrected early in the process, when it is still possible to do so. A decision is also made to reject, or accept-in-principle. This means that authors can know if their study will be published before they have even begun data collection, which is welcome for authors, and reduces incentives to fish for significant results or fudge the analysis. In this talk I will explain the registered reports process, as well as why and how authors of computer science education studies can participate in this new way of publishing.