Browse

Peer review is an important mechanism for advancing knowledge in a manner deemed as acceptable by the research community. It can also serve the function of providing guidance to an author(s) to improve the likelihood that manuscripts will be accepted in peer reviewed journals. There is, however, little assistance for new or existing reviewers of journals beyond the guidelines for reviewers that some journals provide. Moreover, reviewers seldom, if ever, receive feedback on their reviews that might help them to provide higher quality reviews in the future. In this paper, we provide specific recommendations for drafting quality and constructive peer reviews of manuscripts. While we point to the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education as an example, our focus is on encouraging quality reviews across all journals in our field. We base our recommendations on empirical reports, recommendations of editors that have been published in the research literature, and our own experiences as reviewers. Examples of recommended and not recommended review elements are also provided.

The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the weight of scientific evidence regarding student outcomes (physical, cognitive and affective) of a Game Centered Approach (GCA) when the quality of a study was taken into account in the interpretation of collective findings. A systematic search of five electronic databases (Sports Discuss, ERIC, A+ Education, PsychInfo and PROQUEST Education) was conducted from their year of inception to 30 January 2014. Included studies were longitudinal or experimental/quasi-experimental studies involving children or adolescents that quantitatively assessed (using repeat measures and/or comparison with a control group) the effects upon student outcomes when an intervention involved the use of a GCA. The search identified 15 articles examining the effects of GCA on student outcomes that met the criteria for inclusion. The weight of evidence provided by the included studies identified an association between a GCA and the outcomes of declarative knowledge, support during game play and affective outcomes of perceived competence, interest/enjoyment and effort/importance. Development of technical skill, procedural knowledge and game play skills of decision making and skill execution are not supported by the level of evidence currently provided. Intervention volume appears to have a large effect on the development of game based decision making and skill execution, with a positive association between these outcomes and use of GCA interventions greater than eight hours in volume. More longitudinal and intervention research examining the use of a GCA and potential psychological, physiological and behavioral outcomes in children and adolescents is recommended.