Sample Chapter Evaluation Form

Greetings and thank you for lending your expertise and experience as chapter reviewer.

Individuals serving as reviewers are performing an important and valuable job, assuring that the manuscripts they evaluate are being published with integrity and accuracy.

As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), IGI Global takes great pride in ensuring that the highest level of care is taken to administer a robust double-anonymized peer review process on each and every book chapter submitted to IGI Global book publications.

Please take a moment to read through the review criteria below, and in addition you will also find a sample evaluation.

With deepest appreciation,

Lindsay Wertman
Managing Director, IGI Global

Review Criteria

As a reviewer, your comments are valuable to the advancement of your colleagues’ research, even if the chapter is not, in your opinion, publishable.

All reviews should be conducted through the eEditorial Discovery® editorial management system by the assigned due date. Reviewers who complete high-quality reviews in a timely manner are providing an essential service to the field and to the book.

Please carefully read each manuscript, support your evaluation with relevant citations, and, with the goal of helping the authors construct a more rigorous research work, provide constructive feedback. Provide an honest assessment of the value of the chapter. Begin by providing your overall assessment of the work, followed by a specific list of comments. Please bear in mind that although grammatical corrections are valuable, the review must stretch beyond the use of punctuation, spelling, and language usage.

An appropriate evaluation includes an analysis of the chapter’s strengths and weaknesses, suggestions on how to make it more complete, relevant, and readable, as well as specific questions for the authors to address. Provide advice that leads to action. Vague statements and no points of action do not provide goals for the authors and will hinder any subsequent revisions.

Avoid making derogatory and unprofessional comments. If you do not find the chapter publishable, extensive comments regarding why the paper is not acceptable and constructive directions for future submissions should still be provided. A decision to “reject” the manuscript, with no feedback to the authors, does not help them advance their skills.

As such, while conducting your review, consider the following questions:
  • Is the chapter in congruence with the mission of the book?
  • How useful is the material to the field?
  • Does the chapter clearly state the issue being addressed?
  • Does the literature review contain relevant information in support of the chapter?
  • Does the chapter contain a detailed explanation of research methods and procedures?
  • Is the chapter clearly organized in a logical fashion?
  • Are the author's conclusions supported by the research?
Additional tips for improving your review:
  • Provide the page number and explicitly state the areas of the manuscript to which you are referring.
  • Consider providing relevant citations to the authors to improve the work.
  • Do not forget to assess the tables, figures, and diagrams.

** Insert book title here **

Reviewer Number:
Submission Number:

Date Sent:
Date Due:

Chapter Title:

Part I: Rankings (place N/A next to items that do not apply)

Evaluation CriteriaPoor………………………………Excellent
1. Practical managerial significance12345678
2. Appropriateness for this book12345678
3. Adequacy of literature review12345678
4. Adequacy of background12345678
5. Adequacy of analysis of issues12345678
6. Clarity of presentation12345678
7. Organization of chapter12345678

Part II: Editorial Decisions

Editorial Status…………Copy-Editing Status
a. Publishable now a. Requires minor copy-editing
b. Minor revisions necessary b. Requires major copy-editing
c. Major revisions necessary
d. Not publishable

Part III: Chapter Evaluation
Please provide detailed answers to the following questions.

1. Based on your numerical rating in Part I, explain in detail how the chapter does or does not provide sufficient background information and literature review regarding its topic. Include in your assessment thoughts and recommendations as to how the author(s) can augment this area of the manuscript.

1. The background leading to the importance and need for such a chapter is not clear. The background that prompts this is not strong at all.
2. The discussions often come from an assumptions about the reader, i.e they are aware of all possible information within this field. There are many concepts discussed that the writer does not elaborate on.
3. There are too many concepts that were added which are actually not appropriate for the paper. Due to this, the paper becomes disjointed.
4. There is no relationship between the title and most of the sub discussions as per the authors subheadings.
5. Based on the first four lines of the abstract and the sub heading called, 'Educational and business co-operatives...' the latter should have been the crux and/or used to create a more appropriate title for this chapter.
6. On page 4 as you read on, you realise that the chapter is taking a different turn, this manifests with RQ2 which is not felt anywhere else from the title page up to then.

2. List and describe in detail any topic(s) or information related to the discussion in the chapter which appears to be missing. Please provide suggestions as to what topic(s) or information the author(s) can add to ensure that the scope of the chapter’s contents is complete.

1. The difference between the type of co-ops that are the theme of this chapter still require further debate to truly differentiate them. More literature is required to do this and it should be re-articulated, carefully, lead by the purpose of the paper.
2. The education and business co-operative's are central to this paper, therefore they should have been given more attention, preferably firstly as exclusive sub headings before the relationship is further investigated, in line with the purpose of the chapter.

3. Please supply a detailed discussion as to whether or not the information in this chapter clearly illustrates the issues, problems, and trends related to the theme of this proposed book. Please offer your constructive and analytical assessment and list suggestions for improvement and/or enhancement.

1. The paper is not clear on the issues and problems this paper is hoping to solves
2. All the important variables need to be defined adequately
3. A relationship between these variables needs to be identified.
4. How is this going to add value to knowledge in the future, for whom

4. Please provide your opinion as to whether or not the issues, problems, and trends described in this chapter are given appropriate emphasis. Supply specific recommendations as to how the author(s) can improve in this area.

They are not, please refer to the boxes above as the reasons are similar.

5. Give an explanation of any serious over-emphasis or under-emphasis of any issues/problems in the chapter. Please provide critical and constructive assessment by offering suggestions as to how the chapter can be improved and enhanced in this area.

1. All important variables are treated superficially, it is my opinion this is the case because too many variables are dealt without a real need or purpose.

6. In your opinion, what are the weaknesses of this chapter? Please describe how these specific weaknesses contribute to the ineffective aspects of this chapter. We ask that you carefully list specific suggestions for improvement and/or enhancement.

1. The lack of a proper objective, needs and purpose for the chapter are the main weakness.

7. In your opinion, what are the strengths of this chapter? Please describe how these specific strengths contribute to the value and quality aspects of this chapter and how said strengths can be utilized to make the weak areas of the chapter more effective.

Please refer to the boxes above as this has been dealt with

8. Please describe whether or not this chapter is properly directed to the proposed target audience of the book to which it was submitted.

I do not believe it is. It does not really describe or adequately articulate a problem it hopes to solve.

9. Please describe your thoughts on the effectiveness of the organization of the chapter. How can the “flow” of this chapter be improved? Please be specific.

1. The author needs to consult chapter structures from other scholarly papers.
2. It is preferable that the chapter becomes a secondary data discussion, which would mean the primary route that this paper has take is not preferred.

10. Please provide your opinion as to whether or not the references used in this chapter are sufficient, appropriate, and up-to-date. If not, please suggest the relevant references you feel are necessary for the author(s) to include.

It seems to me the references are outdated. 7% of the references are from the past five years. The problem with that is, education and cooperatives have released vast research in these years which could have shared light on this discussion and added value to it.

Part IV: Comments to the Author(s)
Please provide your constructive comments to the author(s) for improving and revising the chapter.

This article is not structured for academic book purposes. I would advise the author consults academic book chapters to assist in this regard. The chapter discussed many interesting and important variables within a broad spectrum of co-operatives, education business and entrepreneurial learning, however, there was no clear relationship that bound these concepts. Add to that, the research methodology needs to be defined scholarly, issues of validity and reliability are very questionable. There are very critical discussions that appear post the methodology, which in fact should appear before. The paper needs to be reworked driven by a clear purpose and its' importance.

Part V: Comments to the Editor
Please provide any comments or suggestions to the editor regarding your position concerning this chapter. Please be specific as to whether or not you feel this chapter is publishable. (Note that these comments will NOT be shared with the author[s]).

It seems this has been written for other purposes and not this chapter as it is very disjointed. I could be wrong, however, this it seems was edited from a larger project therefore makes the work disjointed causing breaks in argument and clouding the purpose of the study which is not clear. I have picked up a number of sub theme's which could have been in separate chapters. That said, I believe this paper would have to change focus if the author plans to make improvements and concentrate on page 2-7 as the area to write the chapter on. The writer tries to place as many variables as possible leading to a loss of focus and direction. The relevance, importance and need for the whole chapter is not made clear. Lastly, the work needs to be edited,professionally.

Last Updated July 10, 2018