Conceptual Paper Review - Journal of Virtual Studies

Instructions: Peer reviewers are responsible for rating the quality of each criteria, providing actionable feedback, and recommendations for improvement for the assigned submission. If no revisions are required, comments should provide specific feedback on the quality demonstrated for each criteria. Ratings of neither agree nor disagree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree, need to be accompanied by substantive recommendations for fixing these concerns, not just criticize what was wrong. Keep in mind that authors wish to improve their work, and criticism without feedback do not fulfill the obligations of a reviewer.

Please be aware that all comments and ratings are shared with the author, with the exception of the reviewer name and comments to editor. Keep your audience in mind when writing comments that will assist them in improving their paper, if revisions become necessary.

Identification of Paper

Submission ID *

Title of Paper *

Reviewer Name *

Introduction

Introduction specifically and clearly sets up the context of the ideas that will be conceptualized in the paper, including a clear thesis or proposition *

Provide specific, constructive and actionable feedback and recommendations on the paper’s described introduction and thesis.

Theory or Framework

Relevant theory or frameworks describe a clear topic to be deconstructed conceptual discussion *

Provide specific, constructive and actionable feedback and recommendations on the paper’s described theory or framework as the bases for a conceptual discussion.

Supporting Literature

Supporting Literature Review is thorough and relevant to the topic, with recent studies cited and explored in order to support the thesis as it is being developed *

Provide specific, constructive and actionable feedback and recommendations on the paper’s literature review as it supports the conceptual discussion. *

Implications and Conclusions

Implications and Conclusions draw a clear connection to logical next steps and potential generalizability to various education contexts, which should also bring the thesis to a logical conclusion *

Provide specific, constructive and actionable feedback and recommendations on the paper’s described implications and conclusions. *

Grammar and Usage

Grammatically correct, smoothly flowing, and appropriately organized to showcase the content *

Provide specific, constructive and actionable feedback and recommendations if errors or poor writing conventions were exhibited.

Recommendation

What do you recommend for this paper? *

Acceptance with no revisions (most ratings are strongly agree)

Acceptance with revisions (ratings are mixture of agree and disagree)

Reject with recommendations to resubmit with major revisions (ratings are mostly disagree, but may be able to adjust organization or expand information to become suitable upon revisions)

Reject (no agree, strongly agree, or the paper did not really fit the conventions of a research paper)

Would you be willing to review a revised version of this paper? *

Yes

No

Comments to Editor *

Comments to editor will not be shared with author (this section is mandatory if the recommendation is either of the rejection options above. Otherwise please include n/a.)