These are members of the EJOLTs community that are currently available as peer reviewers
- Professor Stephen Bigger, United Kingdom
- Prof. Lesley Wood, South Africa
- Dr Arianna Briganti, Italy
- Dr Pip Bruce Ferguson, New Zealand
- Dr Brian Jennings, Ghana
- Dr Judy McBride, Canada
- Dr Mark Potts, United Kingdom
- Dr Sadruddin Bahadur Qutoshi, Pakistan
- Dr Jocelyn Romero Demirbag, Hawaii
- Dr Liz Wolvaardt, South Africa
- Dr Caitríona McDonagh, Ireland
- Dr Bernie Sullivan, Ireland
- Dr Mohamed Moustakim, Australia
- Dr David Wright, Australia
- Professor Pieter du Toit, South Africa
- Dr Neil Boland, New Zealand
- Dr Judy McBride, Canada
- Dr Michelle Vaughn, USA
- Dr Mary Roach, Ireland
- Joy Mounter, United Kingdom
- Dr Sigrid Gjøtterud, Norway
- Dr Ram Singh-Punia, United Kingdom
- Dr Philip Tattersall, Australia
- Prof. Peter Taylor, Australia
- Dr Jerome Gumede, South Africa
- Dr Geitza Rebolledo, Venezuela
- Dr Eleanor Lohr, United Kingdom
- Dr Mary McAteer, United Kingdom
- Neema Parekh, India
- Giulia Carozzi, Italy
- Dr Jane Spiro, United Kingdom
- Anne Jesudason, Ireland
When a paper is accepted for review a team of three will be formed. The paper's author/s can chose one member from the list above. The other two will be chosen to add to the diversity and balance of expertise, knowledge and experience on the team. It is anticipated that the reviewers as well as the author/s will find the review process educational and we will all benefit from the experience of learning together.
The reviewing process, like all of EJOLTS is constantly evolving so please keep checking the updates. Here are a few pointers to keep in mind:
- Does the submission account for influences the author has developed in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of social formations?
- The submissions should reveal a desire to bring life-affirming and life-enhancing values of, for example, love, freedom, justice, compassion, courage, care and democratic evaluation, more fully into the world.
- In what ways might your own experiences and insights be brought to bear in order to enhance the submission in some way?
Rather than a review being perceived as a static process, we are hoping it will engage reviewers and the author/s (and anyone who is interested) in dynamic discussions in the open review space so we might, together, improve what we are doing.
The team at EJOLTS offers a creative and dialectical space within which we all feel comfortable to challenge and/or affirm in an atmosphere of mutual learning. As reviewers respond to iterations of the paper they will keep in mind the publishing criteria and advising the author what they need to see for the paper to meet the criteria to the point they can advise the Editorial Board that the are recommending we accept for publication.
Please, feel free to join peer-reviewers forum and we would welcome any feedback about the process of review that might help us to improve what we are doing in our journal.