Form
Paper Review Form
EEU Collection of Scientific Papers
’’Scientific Research and Development Department’’
Year/Month/Date_________________
Paper Title _________________________
I. Evaluation Criteria
|
# |
Evaluation Criteria |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
1 |
Compliance with the modern requirements to the scientific papers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Actuality of the theme |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Argumentation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
Depth of Analyses, clarity of the text |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Relevance of conclusions with the results, goals and objectives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
Research novelty |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
Text structure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
Academic citation style |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUM |
|
|||||
II. Reviewer’s comments
|
|
Reviewer’s comments |
|
1. How is the theory and methodology reflected in the paper? |
|
|
2. Does the author demonstrate the latest approaches to the problem? |
|
|
3. How clear and linguistically correct is the text? |
|
|
4. How logical is the interpretation? |
|
|
5. At what level is the scientific contextualization of results and conclusions presented (scientific discussion - how does the elaboration of the problem posed in the article resonate with general scientific problems? |
|
|
6. How relevant are the title, annotation and conclusions of the article? |
|
III. Constructive recommendations to the author/s
Additional notes and recommendations to improve the paper: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For instance:
- Submit the article to a language specialist for linguistic editing and structure the text according to the requirements for the collection of scientific papers
- Theoretical conceptual framework should be more clarified
- Make the concepts used clearer
- Follow the APA Style[1]
IV. Reviewer's recommendations for the editor of a collection of scientific papers Describe your opinions on whether or not to publish the article (your comments remain anonymous). Eg., My opinions are reflected in the comments, in the context of such data (research questions, language, methods, results, discussion ..._ The article should not be published.
V. Reviewer’s decision
Please, select an appropriate graph
|
Conclusion |
Score |
|
|
Accept - unconditionally |
31-40 |
|
|
Accept - with minor revision without further review |
21-30 |
|
|
Reject - Requires major revision and further review |
11-20 |
|
|
Reject - Does not meet the scientific requirements |
0-10 |
|
|
Irrelevant - for the EEU Collection of Scientific Papers |
0 |
|
(Name, Surname, Signature of Reviewer) ___________________________________________
(Academic degree) _____________________________________________
(Workplace) ____________________________________________________
(Position) _______________________________________________________
(Tel/Mob.) _____________________________________________________
(E-mail) ______________________________________________________
* Information on the reviewer is confidential.
** Completed form must be sent to the editorial board of EEU Collection of Scientific Papers to the following e-mail: sciencepapers@eeu.edu.ge