VCSEwiki:Quality criteria

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Review process

For quality criteria, you can enter the Review process of some academic journals:

Analysis of evaluation reports of scientific papers: what referees say
See also List of academic journals - select one and find out the rules!
For the process of reviewing itself, see Peer Review in Wikipedia

Example of Review Form

JOURNAL OF TEACHER EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABILITY

Paper title:

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

1. General Recommendation (check one):

1.1. Publish as is ___

1.2. Acceptable with minor modifications _

1.3. Might be accepted after major modifications ___

1.4. Unacceptable (check all that apply) ___

1.4.1. Not appropriate for the theme of the Conference ___

1.4.2. Technically deficient ___

1.4.3. Quality of presentation is poor ___

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

2. Summary Comments for Author(s)

Please enter the appropriate word from the choices in parentheses

2.1. Interest of the subjects to the themes of the Conference (High/Medium/Low) ......................

2.2. Originality of the paper (High/Medium/Low) ......................

2.3. Adequate references to prior and related works by other authors (High/Medium/Low) ......................

2.4. Accurate information (Yes/No) .........................

2.5. Current information (Yes/No) .......................

2.6. Methodology (Yes/No) ...........................

2.7. Writing style is generally (Excellent/Readable/Poor) ....................

2.7.1. Paper is logically organised (Yes/No) ....................

2.7.2. Ideas are clearly presented (Yes/No) ....................

2.8. Meets submission requirements (abstract, length, style) (Yes/No) …..........

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

3. Written Comments for Author(s)