An alternative vision for peer review: dialogical perspectives

Abstract

I am presenting an alternative focus to peer assessment and participation for publishing in an international journal. Co-editors decide whether articles are suitable for publication, assessors are selected because of their field of specialisation and their position in this field, and it is also sought for these assessors to contribute different perspectives, while the public forums allow peer assessment to be visible to the journal’s readers. The assessment process takes the central role in a process of dialogue in which the points of agreement and disagreement are identified and understood as progress in the field of science and mathematics education.