Guidelines for Reviewers

JAMSTE Peer Review Guidelines

Introduction

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for contributing to the review process of manuscripts submitted to JAMSTE. Our journal is committed to maintaining the quality and integrity of scientific knowledge within the fields of Science, Mathematics, and Technology education. We have adopted a double-blind peer review model to ensure the highest academic standards. This guideline is designed to assist you in the review process and ensure the consistency of your evaluations.

Principles of the Peer Review Process

  • Impartiality and Objectivity: Conduct your reviews by focusing solely on the scientific content, free from personal biases.

  • Confidentiality: Maintain strict confidentiality of author and reviewer identities. Do not share the manuscript or the review process with third parties.

  • Constructive Feedback: Provide detailed feedback that helps authors improve their work, regardless of the final recommendation.

  • Ethical Standards: Adhere to scientific integrity in accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines.

Evaluation Criteria

Your evaluation should focus on the following core areas:

  1. Scientific Contribution:

    • Does the manuscript make an original and significant contribution to Science, Mathematics, or Technology education?

    • Does it offer a new perspective on existing STEM literature or educational practices?

  2. Methodological Accuracy:

    • Are the research methods (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods) valid and reliable?

    • Is the research design, particularly in laboratory or technology-integrated settings, appropriate?

  3. Presentation of Data and Findings:

    • Are the data presented clearly and accurately?

    • Are the results supported by obtained data and interpreted correctly in line with the research question?

  4. Compliance with Literature:

    • Does the manuscript adequately cover current developments in the related STEM fields?

  5. Writing and Presentation Quality:

    • Does the manuscript comply with APA writing standards? Is the language clear and academically rigorous?

  6. Ethical Evaluation:

    • Identification of potential ethical violations such as plagiarism or data fabrication.

Evaluation Report

Your report should include the following elements:

  • General Evaluation: A summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the work.

  • Detailed Feedback: Specific comments on each section of the manuscript.

  • Correction Suggestions: Concrete steps authors can take to improve the study.

  • Publication Recommendation: A clear suggestion for Acceptance, Revision (Minor/Major), or Rejection.

Evaluation Process

  1. Initial Check: Confirm that the topic fits your expertise and that you have sufficient time for the review.

  2. Analysis: Read the manuscript carefully and evaluate it against the criteria above.

  3. Preparation: Draft a constructive and detailed report.

  4. Submission: Upload your report to JAMSTE’s online system within the specified timeframe.

Additional Information

  • Anonymity: JAMSTE ensures that identities remain confidential throughout the double-blind process.

  • Support: If you have any questions, please contact the JAMSTE editors.

  • Final Decision: The editorial board will make the final decision based on your expert feedback.

Thank you again for your invaluable contribution to the scientific community and to JAMSTE.