Evaluation

Peer Review Process

1 - When the editors become aware of the submission, they appoint ad-hoc referees, researchers of recognized competence who investigate the content covered in the article, to evaluate it.

2 - At least two evaluators and a third reviewer must evaluate all texts if the editors consider a third evaluation necessary.

3 - The executive editor contacts the evaluators and makes the text available in the Journal's system, creating a login and password for the evaluator to have access to the manuscript. Periodically, the executive editor checks deadlines and reminds evaluators about the requested task, considering the evaluation guidelines presented below.

4 - Upon learning of the opinions, the editors consider what the editorial decision will be. Typically, editors accept the evaluators' suggestions regarding the relevance of the publication or not. All authors receive the content of the evaluations, whether the approval or not of proposed text. At no time do the authors or reviewers know the identity of one or the other.

5 - If reviewers request changes to form or content, authors must forward the corrected text to the Journal on the indicated date, with markings to highlight the changes made.

6 - When the editor considers it necessary, the revised text is resent again to the reviewers so that they can check whether the changes made comply with the opinions issued.

7 - It is possible to conduct a second round of evaluation; that is, the editorial board indicate a new evaluator to analyze the revised text.

8 - Having received the responses from the reviewers, the editor will decide whether to approve the article and communicate the result of the evaluation process to the author(s).

9 - Once the reviewers approve an article, the editor forwards it for editing. At this time, the executive editor will provide the final review and, if applicable, will contact the author(s) for corrections and changes by the authors.

10 - Final approval of the submission does not guarantee its immediate publication, as the Journal must compose each volume considering the diversification of authorship by institutions and regions of the country, in addition to requiring an interstice of two years for the same author to have a new publication.

11 - In the Assessment Guidelines, it is possible to find the recommendations for evaluators for reviewing submissions.

 

Assessment Guidelines

The main objective of the Revista Eletrônica de Educação – REVEDUC is to publish articles, essays, and dossiers in any language on topics that contribute to the revival of educational debate, as well as to the dissemination of knowledge produced in the area. The editorial policy defines the following categories for analyzing texts:

1 - Originality of the theme, or its treatment, and contribution to the area;

2 - Established relationship of the article with the literature, its relevance, and pertinence, considering the research area;

3 - Consistency and rigor in the theoretical-methodological approach, in the argumentation, and its description;

4 - Consistency and adequacy of analyses, clarity of conclusions, and articulation with the ideas presented;

5 - Practical applications and other investigations must be consistent with the results and conclusions of the work;

6 - Quality and clarity of the ideas presented, considering the technical language of the field and the knowledge expected of the Journal's readers, objective, cohesive, and intelligible text;

7 - Recommendations:

Accept (no need for content corrections by the author)

Accept (conditional on mandatory corrections by the author(s). In this case, the evaluator must inform whether the requested changes are minimal or extensive)

Reject

8 - Comments and suggestions for the editor-in-chief;

9 - Comments and suggestions for authors.