Information Science Working Paper/Discussion Paper Series

Information for Editors

Purpose of the Series

The Information Science Working Paper and Discussion Paper Series together provide a forum for discussion through the distribution of previously unpublished papers that are concerned with topics relating to the discipline of information science. Along with papers dealing purely with aspects of information science, contributions investigating the application of information science principles to other domains (e.g. cognitive science and surveying) are also encouraged.

Purpose of this Evaluation

The impetus for the establishment of the Series came from the department's research student group. They view the Series as an ideal opportunity to obtain constructive feedback concerning their research at a number of interim project stages. Thus one of the primary objectives of the Series is to generate constructive discussion and feedback for the authors. I would therefore encourage you to provide detailed comments and recommendations relating to the ideas expressed in the paper and the general direction of the entire research project. (Please note: an anonymous copy of your assessment will be passed on to the authors).

I look forward to receiving your completed report form within the next two weeks. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Series Co-ordinator

Email: workpapers@commerce.otago.ac.nz

Information Science Working Paper/Discussion Paper Series

Editor's Report Form

Title of Paper:	____________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

Please consider the importance of the subject of the paper (not to be confused with the overall quality of the paper as presented):

1.	of little interest/importance	□

2.	of some interest	□

3.	important, interesting work	□

4.	very important, major results	□

Comments:

Please tick the boxes and add below each question your praise, criticism, and other comments, and particularly your suggestions of improvements that would make the paper more suitable for publication.

Yes	No

1.	Does the title properly describe the paper?	□	□

Comments:

2.	Does the abstract bring out the main points?	□	□

Comments:

3.	Does the paper contain errors of fact or logic?	□	□

Comments:

Yes	No

4.	Is the subject of the paper suitable for publication

in the Series?	□	□

Comments:

5.	Is the purpose of the paper clearly described?	□	□

Comments:

6.	Is the writing clear and the grammar correct?	□	□

Comments:

7.	Is the paper organised in a logical fashion?	□	□

Comments:

8.	Can any parts be omitted or shortened?	□	□

Comments:

9.	Should any parts be expanded?	□	□

Comments:

10.	Are the references adequate?	□	□

Comments:

11.	Can any illustrations or tables be omitted?	□	□

Comments:

Yes	No

12.	Are any additional illustrations or tables required?	□	□

Comments:

Overall evaluation - Please grade the paper as submitted to you.

1.	excellent paper - accept as it stands	□

2.	useful paper - probably accept	□

3.	accept only after minor revision	□

4.	accept only after major revision	□

5.	reject - wrong and/or misleading	□

Please detail below comments and suggested revisions concerning the content of the paper and the general direction of the research. (Please continue on a separate page if necessary).

NAME:	____________________________________________________

SIGNATURE:	______________________________ DATE: _____________