Review Instructions

Let's have a simple role play: You are asked to act as one of the reviewer in a workshop. Our seminar will play to role of the workshop. You have been assigned a number of papers to review. In our case, you will have two papers to review. You need to submit your review in electronic form to the conference organiser (role played by Jussi).

Public Part of Review

The review form (public part) has the following questions, you need to answer. You should post this part in the wiki. You can find the template in the Seminar Working Area

Paper Information: Author, title

Overview: Write a couple of sentences about what you see are the key points in the paper, what the paper speaks about.

Evaluation part:

• Intelligibility
• Technical quality
• Presentation quality
• Overall grade

Please evaluate those four items using the scale 1 to 5. 1 poor, 3 medium, 5 high.

Intelligibility: Evaluate things like how easy it was to understand, was the presentation in a good level, not too simple, not too difficult.

Technical quality: References ok, figures have titles, etc. technical features of the paper

Presentation quality: Language issues here.

Overall quality: What grade would you give to the paper in overall

Private Part of Review

Please create also a lot of detailed comments about the reviewed papers. You can write these either in a separate file or just write them by hand on the paper itself.

You could look at the structure: Is there any connection between sections? Are the different parts totally different?

Mark also language issues, unclear parts, make suggestions for improvements etc. These can be listed also directly to the article.

This detailed commenting help you to improve your own proof-reading skills. These skills will be useful when editing your own texts also.

The comments can be given directly to the author at the meeting.