| Pre-Evaluation Criteria | Strong
(Level 1) |
Fair
(level 2) |
Poor
(level 3) |
|
| Title: Straightforward, informative, and represents the contents of the article. | 5 | 3 | 2 | |
|
Abstract: Concise but at least contain the problem, purpose, method, important findings, and implications of the research. |
10 | 5 | 2 | |
|
Keywords: Searchable by search engine, truly represents the intention of research. Don’t use phrases, only words. 5 to 6 keyword is recommended. |
5 | 3 | 2 | |
|
Introduction: Directing the reader about the importance of the research. Presenting significant problems, a clear state of the art, gap analysis, and novel concepts to fill the gaps. End it with the purpose of research. |
15 | 10 | 5 | |
|
Method: Clear and replicable. Reveals how research objectives are achieved with the appropriate tools, procedures, and stages. |
10 | 5 | 2 | |
|
Results: Presenting experimental or survey data, or any other kind of data depending on the type of research. The results are generally presented in clear and readable tables and figures. |
15 | 10 | 5 | |
|
Discussion: Meaningful. Good discussion is written as a dialogue that reveals the progress of the research in comparison to previous researches. |
20 | 15 | 5 | |
|
Conclusion: Contains a summary of research results (the most important research finding) that relates with the objectives written in the introduction. |
10 | 4 | 1 | |
|
References: Accountable, about 80% of the literatures from primary sources (reputable journals) and up to date (last 10 years). Use reference management tools. |
10 | 5 | 1 | |
| Total score | 100 | 60 | 25 |
| Score | Probability |
|
85-100 |
Most likely to be published with little discussion with Editor/Reviewer |
|
70-84 |
Possible minor revision (if there are no mistakes in principle) |
|
50-69 |
Possible major revision |
|
25-49 |
Most likely to be rejected in the first stage |