CERME9 PAPER REVIEW FORM 1 – EMPIRICAL STUDY
For Theoretical/Philosophical Papers, please go to the second version of this form, below.
RETURN BY E-MAIL as soon as possible, but no later than 25th November 2014
TO: (group leader) …………………………………………………
Thematic Working Group Number and Title:……..……………………………………………………
Title of the paper proposal:…………………………………………………………………………………..
Name of the reviewer:……………………………………………….. E-mail address: ……………………….
YOUR REVIEW
Please comment in each of the following sections. In each section use as much space as required.
1. Focus and rationale of the paper
2. Theoretical framework and related literature
3. Methodology
3. Statement and discussion of results
4. Clarity
5. Relevance to this CERME9 TWG audience
My recommendations for presentation at CERME9 are as follows (mark one):
1. ACCEPT for presentation without further modification
2. ACCEPT for presentation subject to modification as detailed below
3. REJECT but resubmit the paper as a poster
4. REJECT
Detailed reasons for the recommendation and general comments (e.g. suggestions for improvement,
reasons for rejection/unsuitability):
CERME9 PAPER REVIEW FORM 2 – THEORETICAL/PHILOSOPHICAL PAPER
For Research Study Papers, please go to the first version of this form, above.
RETURN BY E-MAIL as soon as possible, but no later than 25th November 2014
TO: (group leader) …………………………………………………
Thematic Working Group Number and Title: ……..……………………………………………………
Title of the paper proposal:…………………………………………………………………………………..
Name of the reviewer:……………………………………… E-mail address: ……………………
YOUR REVIEW
Please comment in each of the following sections. In each section use as much space as required.
1. Focus and rationale of the paper
2. Theoretical or philosophical framework and related literature
3. Author’s position on the focus or theme
3. Implications for existing research in the area
4. Clarity
5. Relevance to this CERME9 TWG audience
My recommendations for presentation at CERME9 are as follows (mark one):
1. ACCEPT for presentation without further modification
2. ACCEPT for presentation subject to modification as detailed below
3. REJECT but resubmit the paper as a poster
4. REJECT
Detailed reasons for the recommendation and general comments (e.g. suggestions for improvement,
reasons for rejection/unsuitability):