Information for reviewers

The review process ensures a high-quality and objective evaluation of submitted contributions and provides authors with feedback. Reviewers assess submissions in an anonymized form and provide a written review with recommendations for further steps:

  1. Publish the contribution without modifications.
  2. Publish the contribution after revisions according to the reviewers' recommendations.
  3. Do not publish the contribution in its current form – the author may revise and resubmit it for a new review process.

Template for downloading the review form here.

Reviewers evaluate submissions within a maximum period of 20 days. The journal's editorial board receives the reviews and makes an objective final decision on acceptance, rejection, or recommended revisions.

Template for downloading the review form [here].

Evaluation Criteria

Formal Aspects

  • Structure, logical coherence, and consistency of the text.
  • Correspondence between the title, abstract, and content.
  • Clarity and comprehensibility of the explanation.
  • Adherence to linguistic norms and APA guidelines.
  • Complete and accurate citations.

Content Aspects

  • Topic selection in relation to the journal’s academic focus.
  • Relevance, significance, and contribution of the issue (to theory, methodology, practice, etc.).
  • Definition of the theoretical framework.
  • Precise formulation of the presented problem.
  • Clearly defined objectives.
  • Discussion of the obtained results.
  • Adherence to ethical norms of scientific work.

Specifics of Different Types of Contributions

Research Study

  • Relevance of the issue in the context of previous research.
  • Formulation of theoretical background, research objectives, and questions.
  • Description of research methodology, data analysis methods, and interpretation of results.
  • Quality of communication, adequacy, and reliability of data.
  • Depth of discussion, formulation of conclusions, and recommendations for further research or practice.

Maximum length: 35,000–40,000 characters (approximately 15-20 pages).

Methodological Study

  • Description of new approaches, procedures, or strategies applicable in special education and related disciplines.
  • Theoretical background and implementation methods.
  • Practical applications.
  • Critical analysis of advantages and limitations of the methods.
  • Assessment of effectiveness based on empirical or theoretical findings.

Maximum length: 35,000–40,000 characters (approximately 15-20 pages).

Theoretical Study

  • An original approach to the examined problem.
  • Reflection on the theoretical framework and its significance for the development of the issue.
  • Applicability of theoretical approaches in practice and their potential for broader utilization.

Maximum length: 35,000–40,000 characters (approximately 15-20 pages).

Review Study

  • A systematic and comprehensive overview of the issue.
  • High-quality analysis and synthesis of literature (domestic and international sources).
  • Definition of criteria for evaluating the cited studies.
  • Ensuring a balanced selection of citations.

Maximum length: 35,000–40,000 characters (approximately 15-20 pages).

Discussion

  • Reflection on current topics, new trends, or challenges in the field.
  • Comparative or contrasting approach to different research studies or trends.
  • Analysis of changes in the field and discussion of new approaches and methods.
  • Practical challenges and analysis of the current state of the discipline.

Maximum length: 10,000–15,000 characters (approximately 4-8 pages).

Report

  • A concise and informative description of important events, conferences, or activities related to the field.
  • An overview of key topics and outcomes from professional conferences, workshops, or other events.

Maximum length: 8,000–10,000 characters (approximately 3-5 pages).

Review

  • A critical assessment of published books, articles, or other academic publications.
  • Objective evaluation of content, methodology, and contribution of the publication to the field.

Maximum length: 6,000–8,000 characters (approximately 2-4 pages).

Review Preparation Procedure

Reviewers prepare a written review in which they:

  1. Summarize the main ideas of the contribution and its significance for the field.
  2. Evaluate the contribution based on the above criteria, identifying its strengths and weaknesses.
  3. Provide recommendations for potential revisions.
  4. Propose a final decision: accept without revisions / accept with revisions / reject in its current form.

The review process is anonymous – reviewers do not know the authors' identities and vice versa.

Submission of the Review Report

The completed review form must be submitted to the journal's editorial board within 20 days of receiving the contribution. The editorial board then informs the authors of the review outcome and any necessary revisions.

Please submit review reports electronically to: monika.kadrnozkova@pedf.cuni.cz

Thank you for your professional contribution to ensuring the quality of the journal Literacy, Pre-literacy, and Education.