You are here

Information for Reviewers


If you would like to review JOMA submissions, please contact the Editor, Like every peer-reviewed journal, JOMA depends critically on the efforts of volunteer referees and editors.

Instructions for Reviewers

Please read the article and try the software, if any. Then send an email with your conclusions about the following:


It is, of course, a requirement that the article be mathematically correct. Any discussion of technology, pedagogy, or other issues should also be checked for accuracy. Please note any areas that you were unable (either due to limits on your time or your background) to check for accuracy.


Does the article present interesting new ideas? Note that a new presentation of old material using online resources can be both interesting and new if it will make the readers think about the old material in a new way, or if it illustrates a new approach to presenting the material to students. Is this article likely to spark new thoughts for the readers of JOMA?


As the name JOMA implies, both mathematics and online resources of some form should be important to the article. One of our goals is to make full use of the web as a medium for the communications of mathematics.

In addition, JOMA is aimed at the general membership of MAA. While it is perfectly appropriate for an article to be aimed at a specific slice of that membership (teachers of combinatorics, for example), the article shouldn't be something of interest to only a small group of researchers.


Is any software sufficiently user-friendly? Is it easily available? Were there difficulties downloading, installing, or accessing the software?


Your recommendation should be one of the following:

  1. Accept as is (possibly with a few typos corrected)
  2. Accept with revisions
  3. Return for revisions
  4. Reject

Obviously, you should recommend a good and polished article be accepted as is. You should recommend that good article that just needs some small corrections be accepted with revisions. Recommend a article be returned for revisions if it has a core of a good idea but needs substantial rewriting and will need to be looked at again after revision. Recommend rejection for articles that are incorrect, uninteresting, or inappropriate for JOMA.

Please be as precise as you can about how the article should be revised. Revisions can be as small as clearing up a confusing paragraph or suggesting that several sections be rewritten to emphasize some aspect of the material.

It would be a service to the author and editor if you would note any typographical errors or software bugs encountered during your review. Your comments will be shared anonymously with the author. Thank you for all your help.

"Information for Reviewers," Convergence (July 2004)