832
edits
VCSEwiki:Peer review: Difference between revisions
m
Admin moved page Peer review to VCSEwiki:Peer review
m (Admin moved page Peer review to VCSEwiki:Peer review) |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
== Review process == | == Review process - academic articles == | ||
*For the process of reviewing itself, see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review Peer Review] in Wikipedia | |||
For quality criteria, you can enter the Review process of some academic journals: | For quality criteria, you can enter the Review process of some academic journals: | ||
*[http://www.cec-wys.org/prilohy/996055c0/What%20referees%20say.pdf Analysis of evaluation reports of scientific papers]: what referees say | *[http://www.cec-wys.org/prilohy/996055c0/What%20referees%20say.pdf Analysis of evaluation reports of scientific papers]: what referees say | ||
**See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals List of academic journals] - select one and find out the rules! | **See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_journals List of academic journals] - select one and find out the rules! | ||
** | *Example of the [[peer review form for case studies]] | ||
*Read also [[Quality criteria]] | |||
= Example of Review Form = | == Example of Review Form - research papers == | ||
Paper title: | Paper title: | ||
| Line 17: | Line 19: | ||
== 1. Basic criteria == | == 1. Basic criteria == | ||
1.1. Relevance of the subject to the general theme (High/Medium/Low) | 1.1. Relevance of the subject to the general theme (High/Medium/Low) | ||
1.2. Coherence of the content with the title and thesis (High/Medium/Low) | 1.2. Coherence of the content with the title and thesis (High/Medium/Low) | ||
1.3. Quality of the content from the methodological point of view (see below) (High/Medium/Low) | 1.3. Quality of the content from the methodological point of view (see below) (High/Medium/Low) | ||
1.4. Quality of the text from the formal point of view (see below) (High/Medium/Low) | 1.4. Quality of the text from the formal point of view (see below) (High/Medium/Low) | ||
== 2. Summary Comments for Author(s) == | == 2. Summary Comments for Author(s) == | ||
| Line 68: | Line 70: | ||
4.4.3. Quality of presentation is poor | 4.4.3. Quality of presentation is poor | ||
== Resource == | === Resource === | ||
Modified form of the [http://www.ise-lv.eu/publications.php?show=39&pub=3 JOURNAL OF TEACHER EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY] | Modified form of the [http://www.ise-lv.eu/publications.php?show=39&pub=3 JOURNAL OF TEACHER EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY] | ||