Ponce, Branca Juremade Almeida, Maria Elizabeth BiaconciniFreitas, Silvana Alvesda Silva, Cícero BarbosaAnjos, Danielade Pietri, EmersonPrieto, Rosângela GavioliDias, Érika S. de Almeida C.Camargo, EvaniBranco, Jordanna CasteloSouza, José dos SantosBizelli, José Luís [UNESP]Siman, Lana Mara de CastroMuzzeti, Luci Regina [UNESP]dos Reis, MagaliMartins, EdnaRosito, Margaréte May BenkenbrockBissoto, Maria Luisade Castro, Monica RabeloGimenes, NelsonGualtieri, ReginaSilva, RegisRibeiro, Ricardo [UNESP]Lemes, Sebastião de Souza [UNESP]2018-12-112018-12-112017-01-01Ensaio, v. 25, n. 97, p. 1032-1044, 2017.1809-44650104-4036http://hdl.handle.net/11449/179290The document we presented is the result of the reflection of Editors of Scientific Journals connected to FEPAE Southeast and expresses concrete concerns about the material conditions for the realization of its work and about the evaluation criteria that have been used to qualify its journals. Cheaper budgets, dismantling of university structures that supported many academic journals and indicators which everytime complicate even more the operational procedures involved in editorial production, undermine the national journals. Lack of visibility about the evaluation procedures, absence of dialogue about results and questions connected to the Qualis frequency bring uncertainty for the authors who have in the journals a vehicle for sharing its practices and theories. This way we want to deepen the discussion with the scientific community and the Regulatory Governmental Agency - CAPES - about the destinations reserved to Brazilian Scientific Journals.1032-1044porAcademics journalsCAPESEditorial processEvaluationQualisArtigo10.1590/S0104-40362017002501032S0104-40362017000401032Acesso aberto2-s2.0-85032014563S0104-40362017000401032.pdf585133520948722462340850194139490000-0002-7478-4835