Home
Conferences
All Conferences
Arizona – Interdisciplinary
Los Angeles – Education
Prague – Education
London – Heritage
Lisbon – Livable Cities
Barcelona – Livable Cities
Publications
Books
Journal
Proceedings
Videos
Research
Teaching + Research
The Mediated City
Critical Futures
Awards
Who We Are
Full Paper Review Feedback
Name of conference
*
Delegate Number
*
Paper Title
*
Q1. Relevance & Interest:
Is the paper of relevance and likely to be of interest? To answer yes to this question the paper should be dealing with an appropriate topic or theme. It should be likely to instigate debate among an interdisciplinary audience. It should also be addressing issues that are timely. Add more details in the summary if needed.
Q1
YES, I feel the paper meet a high academic standard in terms of these requirements in most or all of the instances identified.
PARTLY, In my opinion, the paper is sufficiently timely, is adequately aligned with the publication themes, and demonstrates sufficient connection to a range of issues aligned with the topics for proceedings.
NO, I do not think the paper is relevant to the proceedings publication, lacks timeliness, or is too specific to instigate significant debate across a varied disciplinary readership.
Q2. Originality & Quality:
Does the paper represent high quality original research? To answer yes, the paper should demonstrate sufficient range and depth in its analysis. It should document original research or work. It should demonstrate a high level of academic critique. Add more details in the summary if needed.
Q2
YES, The written paper demonstrates all the expected tropes of highest quality scholarship in terms of its research questions, methods, argumentation, theory and presentation.
PARTLY, I am satisfied with the paper’s originality and quality and its presentation of sufficiently new insights and information, but feel it has scope for improvement.
NO, I find the arguments of the paper weakly formulated and feel it lacks sufficiently new perspectives on its subject offer much to its readership.
Q3. Expression and Wordcount:
Is the paper clearly and sufficiently expressed? To answer yes, the paper should be of sufficient length to communicate its key themes. It should be clearly articulated for an interdisciplinary audience. It should demonstrate a level of written English sufficient to clearly express its primary ideas. Add more details in the summary if needed.
Q3
YES, The paper is well written and clearly communicates within wordcount the principal ideas necessary for its readership to fully understand the proposed presentation.
PARTLY, I feel the paper successfully presents its principal arguments in a way that is accessible to an interdisciplinary audience, and is within the approximate wordcount.
NO, In my view, the paper fails to clearly or effectively communicate within the format permitted either because of weak language expression or wordcount issues.
Q3. Formatting and Citation Style:
Does the paper follow the templates provided? To answer yes, the paper should be fully formatted in accordance with the example written paper provided and related guidelines for authors. In addition, it should fully follow the citation style: Chicago Manual of Style Notes Bibliography 17th edition. Add more details in the summary if needed.
Q4
YES, The paper is using the correct citation style for both emotes and bibliography and the author has correctly formatted the paper.
PARTLY, There are a few discrepancies apparent in the use of the citation guidelines or in the formatting, but these are small and should be easy to fix in the production process.
NO, There are obvious and numerous errors in the use of the Chicago Manual of Style Notes Bibliography citation style and / or the author has failed to use the paper template properly.
Summary: 75-150 words (approx.)
*
Keywords/additional comments
Status
Accept
Accept with amendments
Reject with option to resubmit
Reject
