Reviewer Guidelines

Lumat evaluation criteria

Rationale for study

  • The rationale is current and focuses on scholarship most important to justifying the study.
  • The rationale establishes a link between the study and previous research.
  • The rationale provides a strong justification for the importance of the study.

Problems, questions or hypotheses

  • There are one or more explicit problems, questions, or hypotheses.
  • Problems, questions or hypotheses are important to science, mathematics or technology teaching and learning.
  • The problems, questions, or hypotheses link to the rationale.

Methodology

  • The methodology is appropriate for the problems, questions, or hypotheses.
  • The methodology is appropriate for the type of study (e.g., ethnographic, philosophical).
  • The methodology is reported thoroughly but concisely.
  • Samples and sampling procedures are clearly described.
  • Data sources are clearly described.
  • Instrumentation includes reliability and validity.
  • Manuscript includes information on the tools of data gathering, e.g. interview methods, mind maps, observation methods.

Results

  • Data tables, figures, and pictures are complete, easy to read and add significantly to the understanding of the study.
  • Quotations are documented and support assertions or warrants.
  • Data address the problems, questions, or hypotheses.

Discussion/Conclusions

  • The conclusions are supported by the data.
  • The conclusions address the problems, questions, or hypotheses.
  • The conclusions make a convincing argument for the importance/significance of the study for science, mathematics or technology teaching and learning.

Style and expression

  • The manuscript includes an abstract.
  • The title conveys the nature of the study.
  • The manuscript follows the instructed style.
  • The manuscript is clear, concise and easy to read.

Reviewer recommendations

Along with your comments on the review and answers to the editor’s questions, the report should contain a recommendation to the editor. Your options may include:

Accept Submission: The manuscript would be suitable for publication in its current form (after copy-editing and proofreading).

Revisions Required: The manuscript could be suitable for publication after the author(s) have responded to the reviewer comments and made changes where appropriate. These changes could include referencing another work or a rewrite of a few sections.

Resubmit for Review: The manuscript could be suitable for publication after the author(s) have responded to the reviewer comments and made changes where necessary. These changes could include redoing experiments or a substantial rewrite of several sections.

Resubmit Elsewhere: The manuscript is not suitable for the journal it was submitted to, but the content is good and could be suitable for a different journal.

Decline Submission: The manuscript is not suitable and it should not be considered further.