Exchanging and debating ideas is central to the future of adapted physical activity (APA). The Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly (APAQ) welcomes the exchange and debate of ideas related to key issues in our field. The Viewpoint section of APAQ is an important vehicle to achieve this goal.
Different types of papers might qualify as Viewpoint. In general, Viewpoints are subset of articles that reflect a particular position adopted by a person or a group. It is an articulated organized perspective about a particular topic or issue associated with APA. A Viewpoint is a scholarly view on a topic of importance in APA. A Viewpoint must be clearly expressed, and demonstrate a thorough and broad understanding of the literature and practices in the field. The opinion expressed must be cogently presented and lead to insights and possibly new and interesting perspectives. APAQ will expect a Viewpoint paper to stimulate discussion among the APA community that will result in advancing our knowledge and understanding of contemporary issues as well as practice in APA.
While the subjective nature of Viewpoints manuscripts should be taken into account, high scholarly standards for relevance, documentation, organization, and content pertain. The author must establish a context for why the manuscript is justified and must point toward the implications or consequences that might follow from the opinions expressed in the article.
• The article addresses a serious challenge facing the adapted physical activity community.
• The article significantly adds to or enhances our understanding of challenges and/or issues on the subject in question.
• A good case for the Viewpoint is made.
• The context for the article is made in the introduction and a logical case is made for the expression of the Viewpoint.
• The purpose of the Viewpoint is clear and well articulated. The Viewpoint is cogently argued.
• The Viewpoint is based on a thorough understanding of the present body of knowledge and/or practices.
• As needed, the literature is thoroughly reviewed, appraised, and well-integrated.
• Historical background is thoroughly reviewed, where appropriate.
• Key concepts and terms are well explained.
• The manuscript is logically organized, well written, and easy to follow.
• The parts of the manuscript are well integrated, coherent and the conclusions follow.
• Contrasting viewpoints or counter-arguments are considered.
• The perceived benefits, and limitations, of the position advocated are clearly stated.
• The number of references is appropriate and their selection is judicious.