Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines

Articles must be submitted to the Editors by email to: jonathan.boston@vuw.ac.nz  or Policy-Quarterly@vuw.ac.nz.

The journal welcomes contributions of about 4,000 words, written on any topic relating to governance, public policy and management. Articles submitted will be peer reviewed.

Although issues will not usually have single themes, special issues may be published from time to time on specific or general themes, such as marking significant events. In these cases, and on other occasions, contributions may be invited from particular people.

Below is the guidance provided by the editorial team to PQ reviewers:

Policy Quarterly: Peer Review Rubric[1]

PQ expects peer reviewers to provide constructive, narrative feedback for each of the following aspects of a submission. A full explanation of each rating for each category of criteria is available in a second table below.

Reviewer rubric

Criteria

Quality Rating

(Excellent / Very Good / Adequate/Poor)

 

 

1. Statement of problem or purpose

 

2. Relevance of topic to journal [add link to journal mission and purpose]

 

3. Contribution to topic

 

4. Quality of argument

 

5. Handling of evidence

 

6. Written expression and structure

 

Comments for the author

 

 

Quality Rating Explanation

Additional explanation for the “poor” quality rating is not included. The assumption is that a “poor” submission does not meet the standard of “adequate” and should not be considered for publication.

Criteria

Excellent

Very Good

Adequate

1. Statement of problem or purpose

Excellent statement of the theoretical or practical problem or challenge

Good statement of the theoretical problem or challenge

Adequate statement of the theoretical problem or challenge

2. Relevance of topic to journal

Highly relevant to the mission and purpose of the journal

Somewhat relevant to the mission and purpose of the journal

Relevant enough to the mission and purpose of the journal

3. Contribution to topic

Provides significant original contributions to literature on the topic

Provides important original contributions to literature on the topic

Provides adequate original contributions to literature on the topic

4. Quality of argument

Excellent organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument

Good organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument

Adequate organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument

5. Handling of evidence

Provides and an excellent summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources

Provides a good summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources

Provides a fair summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources

6. Written expression and structure

Few to no errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is very clear.

Some errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is good.

Common errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is adequate.

 

 

[1] Rubric has been adapted from the Peer Review Rubric from the Journal of Contemporary Studies (https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/peer_review_rubric.pdf ) and the Peer Review Form from The American Archivist (http://files.archivists.org/periodicals/Peer_Review_Form.pdf)

Copyright Notice

Permission: In the interest of promoting debate and wider dissemination, we encourage use of all or part of the articles appearing in PQ, where there is no element of commercial gain. Appropriate acknowledgement of both author and source should be made in all cases. Please direct requests for permission to reprint articles from this publication to Policy-Quarterly@vuw.ac.nz.

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.