The journal Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education - Nordisk Matematikkdidaktikk, NOMAD, is a journal for research and developmental work in mathematics education. It addresses all that are interested in following the progress in this field in the Nordic countries, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. The main objectives of the journal are to stimulate, support and foster Nordic researchers and post-graduate students in mathematics education and to develop mathematics teaching and teacher education in theory and practice at all levels of the educational system. NOMAD publishes articles based on theoretical analysis as well as empirical studies, reports on results from research- and developmental projects, and discussions of general issues related to mathematics education.
An article accepted for publishing should be of high quality and contribute to the development of the field in the region. The article should have a theoretical basis or origin from clearly defined assumptions. Most manuscripts submitted to the journal are not immediately accepted for publishing but authors are requested to do minor changes or substantial rewriting based on reviewers’ recommendations. The aim of the review process is to successively increase the quality of the manuscripts published in NOMAD, as it becomes more established as a research journal, as well as providing support for authors to reach an appropriate level of quality.
The review process
NOMAD depends on people volunteering to do the important work of reviewing without any economical compensation. Each manuscript submitted to the editors will be normally reviewed by at least two persons. The editors will, on the basis of the written responses from the reviewers, make one of four possible decisions:
- Publish after minor revision
- May be published after major revision
- Re-write and re-submit the manuscript
- Should not be published in NOMAD
The submitted paper is of high quality and should be published. The editors in cooperation with the author make possible changes during the process of preparing the final manuscript.
Publish after minor revision
The submitted paper is good, but certain changes should be made before it can be published. The reviewer may know of certain studies, which should be included among the references made, or may be of the opinion that some of the ideas in the discussion should be developed and made more explicit. A new review of the manuscript is not needed. When the author has made the recommended changes, the editors, as an ordinary editorial management, will make sure that the manuscript is ready for publication. Papers that need a considerable revision should not be placed in this category.
May be published after major revision
One major part of the paper needs further work.
Re-write and re-submit the manuscript
The submitted paper is of interest to NOMAD. It has a good basis, but a considerable revision or development is needed. If the author resubmits a paper, which was originally placed in this category, the revised manuscript should be treated as a new manuscript and go through the original review process. The revised paper will also be reviewed by some of the original reviewers to assess how the author has incorporated points made by the reviewers as well as suggestions to changes.
Should not be published in NOMAD
The submitted paper is not suitable for NOMAD. Reasons could be unsuitable design, insufficient empirical base, difficulties in relating the work to relevant literature or that the manuscript does not add to the development of the actual field in the region. If your opinion is that a revision could make it possible to publish the manuscript you should encourage the author to resubmit on a later occasion. If this is not the case you should recommend that it should not be approved for publishing. It is better not to approve than to encourage the author to carry out a revision when it is little hope that the changes will result in a manuscript that could be published. The author will of course have the right to resubmit a revised manuscript to the editors even if the editors have not recommended to the author.
Comments to the author
In addition to recommendations regarding the publishing, we ask you to write comments to the author. We ask you to write one or two pages including reasons for your review of the manuscript including suggestions for changes. Write the comments in a way so that they can be copied and sent to the author. You should in your comment point to strength and weakness of the paper. This could for example deal with to what extent the issues raised in the article could be of interest to the readers of NOMAD, if the author in a clear and explicit way has built on existing research in the field, if the research design is appropriate and if the conclusions are well substantiated. If you recommend a revision, we ask you to express your suggestions to improvement as clear as possible. The more explicit and detailed comments you give, the more help and support the author and the editors will have from your effort.
Based on the reports from the reviewers the editors produce a final review report, which is sent to the author(s) and to the two reviewers. If you find it necessary to write comments to the editors, which you don’t want the author to read, we ask you to write this in a separate note.