Guidelines for Reviewers

The template for reviews is available here.

The CERME14 review process will completely run through an electronic submission system called ConfTool. Papers will be peer reviewed within TWGs, whereas poster proposals will be reviewed by TWG leaders and co-leaders. These initial reviews only concern acceptance for the conference, and not inclusion in the post-conference proceedings. TWG leaders will organize the review process.

Contributions should be about research, significantly related to mathematics and to education. They should be original and not have been published previously. Contributions need not be limited to completed research. On-going studies may be submitted, provided that a theoretical framework and preliminary results are provided in the text submitted. The contributions should, however, contain all information necessary to inform both reviewers and other researchers.

The contributions should be in the format specified in the Guidelines for Authors and make full use of the CERME14 template. The styles in the CERME13 paper template should not be modified. Only papers using this format in full will be accepted. Length restrictions (eight pages for papers and two pages for poster proposals) should be respected.

Timeline of the Review Process

The TWG leader wills organize an internal peer review within their TWG according to the following timeline and through ConfTool.

  • Initial submission via the CERME14 ConfTool Submission System15th September 2024.
  • September 17-23, 2023: TWG leaders assign reviewers: two TWG participants for each paper, two TWG team members for each poster proposal. All contributions must be reviewed by at least one experienced researcher among the TWG co-authors. Not just presenting authors will be required to review
  • October 14, 2024: Reviewers submit their reviews
  • The TWG Leaders send an email to the authors via ConfTool to inform them about the review decision (acceptance or rejection), status of their submission and revisions requested by 28th October 2024 and, if needed, discusses with them the final adjustments to the papers.
  • In case of acceptance, the authors upload the final version of their proposal to ConfTool by 10th December 2024.
  • Young researchers (those who study in a Master or PhD Program or completed their doctoral study in February 2022 or later) are encouraged to enter their paper that is accepted for the conference for the ERME Paper Award. E-mail send to Zelha Tunc Pekkan, To do so, please inform the Chair of the Paper Award Committee, including the title of your paper that is accepted for the conference, the names of the authors, and the number of your TWG.

Reviewing Paper Submissions (NEW!)

Both reports of studies (involving empirical data, including surveys, observational, ethnographic, experimental or quasi-experimental studies, case studies) and theoretical and philosophical essays are suitable for CERME. Papers should be relevant to the theme of the Thematic Working Group they are submitted to, and should position themselves in the field, referring to related research. It should be clear what is new in the paper and how it builds on past research, or goes in new directions. Proposals that represent new and significant contributions to research in any aspect of mathematics education are especially welcome. Papers should briefly specify their cultural context with an international audience in mind.

Some authors may have had feedback via the Early Bird Submission Process. If so, the TWG leader will forward you a copy of this feedback. Please ensure that you take this feedback into account when reviewing the paper.

Please use the CERME14 Paper Review Form for your reviews. It includes the following criteria for both reports of studies and theoretical and philosophical essays:

  1. Focus and rationale of the paper
  2. Theoretical framework(s) and related literature
  3. Methods and argumentation quality
  4. Statements and discussion of results
  5. Clarity
  6. Relevance to this CERME TWG audience
  7. Adherence to the CERME Template and APA 7 styles
  8. Summary points and suggestions for change

Reviewers will make a clear recommendation on each paper, choosing one of the three points of view referring to the acceptance of a paper for the conference:

  1. ACCEPT for presentation without further modification
  2. ACCEPT for presentation with modifications as detailed below

The reviewers are asked to indicate possible changes that should be done before the conference.

Note that, at CERME14, reviewers do not have the option to propose “accept a paper as a poster”. The decision about presenting a submission as a paper or poster corresponds to the authors and must depend on the type or state of the research presented, not on its quality.

Also note that TWG leaders can decide to reject a paper if its authors do not correctly contribute to the review process.  The conference collaborative work starts during the review process.

Note that all accepted papers will be made available on the CERME14 ConfTool website prior to the conference. This process constitutes the paper presentation as a preliminary to its consideration within the relevant Thematic Working Group at the conference.

The Review Form document is just an aid for your review process. Once finished, please paste your comments and your recommendation into the ConfTool system no later than October 14, 2024. Optionally, you can upload your annotated manuscript as an addition to your review.

Reviewing Poster Proposals

Poster Presentations are suggested for those whose work is more suitably communicated in a pictorial or graphical format or demonstration, rather than through a traditional written text. A time will be allotted within the conference, during which presenters will be available at their posters for informal discussion with conference participants. Posters should be about research, significantly related to mathematics and to education. They must relate to one of the Thematic Working Groups of CERME14.

TWG co-leaders will make their decisions about acceptance or rejection on the following aspects of submitted poster proposals:

  1. a statement about the focus of the poster;
  2. an indication of the theoretical framework (or constructs) of the study reported;
  3. an indication of and justification for its content;
  4. a statement about the format chosen by the author for the poster;
  5. possible implications for the existing research in the area.

For each poster proposal, reviewers will make a clear recommendation, choosing between:

  1. ACCEPT for presentation without further modification
  2. ACCEPT for presentation subject to modification as detailed below

The reviewers are asked to indicate possible changes that should be done before the conference.

Please read in conjunction with the guidelines for authors and for TWG leaders.


Guidelines for Reviewers

Review Form