Article:
Date:
Criteria / Excellent / Good / Adequate / Weak / Poor / NASignificance of topic
Quality of ideas
Readability
Appropriateness for Journal
Comments:{e.g. To what extent do the paragraphs and sentences flow together? How can the author improve text flow? Does the author provide a clear introduction, main section and conclusions? How can this be further improved?}
Criteria / Excellent / Good / Adequate / Weak / Poor / NA
Follows APA style
Spelling and grammar
Tables and figures
References
Comments:{e.g. Are all sources properly cited? Do you miss key references? Are they up-to-date (especially policy)? Are quotations worked smoothly into the writer's prose? }
*If reviewer is not familiar with APA style, mark NA
Criteria / Excellent / Good / Adequate / Weak / Poor / NALiterature review
Research design and methodology*
Use of evidence to support positions, propositions or hypotheses*
Conclusions and Recommendations
Comments:{e.g.Is the evidence presented clearly in the text, so that the reader could understand points without the help of figures, tables, and graphs? Are graphs and images used effectively?How is the balance of detail and overview in the article? Can it be improved.}
*depending on whether the article is a research report or a review, one of the two may be applicable.
Overall Assessment – Main ideas for improvementsWhat three things would you most improve in the text? {Peer reviewers should provide actionable comments and concrete ideas for improvement. Based on these comments, the authors are asked to modify their articles. Vague comments with no context or without the exact text reference are generally unhelpful.}
Recommendation{Select one}
Publish as submitted / Return to author for major revision / Not suitable for publication in MNJR / Publish with minor editorial changes.
Thank you very much for serving as a reviewer for the Maldives National Journal of Research
1