Please complete all fields below.

Click this link to access the article for Review:

Review Due Date 04/26/2024

INSTRUCTIONS & CONSIDERATIONS

Reviewers should keep in mind that the Resistant Knowledges call for paper is written to attract a broad range of submissions. The “Concepts from the Call for Papers” section of the review form lists a range of applicable categories. As such, there will be instances within every review when categories will not be applicable to the submission. In those instances a notation of N/A is appropriate. That said, each submission should have a clearly established context of community and relatability to at least one other concept discussed within the call for papers.

REVIEW CATEGORIES & SCORING

CONCEPTS FOR CALL FOR PAPERS

COMMUNITY

Prompt 1

The framing or context of community - Are there discussion/points to understand community through, for example(s), empowerment, impact, disenfranchisement, cultural relevance, etc… (1-5)

RE-SEARCH

Prompt 2

The framing or context of re-search -Approach and/or methodology addressing the normalcy of hegemonic (traditional) Western framings of academic work and scholarship/ research. Disrupting whiteness, hegemony, patriarchy etc - (1-5)

Prompt 3

The distinction between research and re-search are clearly stated/understood (1-5)

Prompt 4

The re-search addresses some form hegemonic (dominance) framing (1-5)

Prompt 5

The re-search perspective works well with balance of the paper/article (1-5)

COLONIALITY

Prompt 6

The framing or context of coloniality or decoloniality - clearly presented and understandable (1-5))

Prompt 7

Use of literature/reference to shape coloniality or decoloniality (1-5))

Prompt 8

The discussion about countering coloniality of decoloniality is clear (1-5)

RESISTANT KNOWLEDGES

Prompt 9

Does the submission deliver on and/or connect to the overall concept/theme of Resistant Knowledges (1-5)

STRUCTURE & FLOW

Prompt 10

Abstract –Accurately reflects the content and makes a compelling case to read the article.(1-3)

Prompt 11

Introduction -– The clarity of the concept/thesis/hypothesis, appropriate background. A case made is the significance of the article. (Theory/Research/Position) (1-5))

Prompt 12

Concept 1 - Concepts/Points made within intro clearly laid out and persuasively supported and articulated (1-5))

Prompt 13

Concept 2 - Concepts/Points supported citations and/or data (1-5)

Prompt 14

Discussion Component 1 - Clearly understood as individual components (1-5)

Prompt 15

Discussion Component 2 - Clearly understood as how individual components work together / synthesized (1-5)

Prompt 16

Conclusion 1- Relevance of findings/assertions (1-5)

Prompt 17

Conclusion 2 - supported within discussion (body) (1-5)

QUALITY

Prompt 18

Does the paper flow - what is the level of continuity of thought from introduction to conclusion? (1-4)

Prompt 19

Operationalization - are the terms and concepts within the paper clearly defined and understandable? (1-4)

Prompt 20

Reference Structure - do the references and citations within the paper match the context of the paper? Do the references and citations enhance/support the discussion within the paper? (1-4)

Prompt 21

The conclusion - Does the conclusion provide an appropriate summation of the points within the paper. Are the assertions within the conclusion supported within the body of the paper. (1-4)

OVERVIEW