Peer Review

The review process for the scientific journal is designed to ensure a rigorous evaluation of submitted manuscripts. The process is structured to maintain high academic standards while providing constructive feedback to authors. Here's an overview of the review process:

  • Submission and Initial Assessment:
      • Authors submit their manuscripts electronically to the journal.
      • Upon submission, the manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the editor-in-chief.
      • Papers that meet the basic criteria and align with the journal's scope proceed to the review process.
  • Desk Rejection or Further Review:
      • Manuscripts may face desk rejection if they fail to meet the journal's standards or fall outside the scope.
      • If selected for further review, the papers proceed to the peer review stage.
  • Double-Blind Peer Review:
      • The selected manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process.
      • At least two independent referees with expertise in the manuscript's field are assigned by the editor.
      • Referees assess the paper's quality, validity of research methods, relevance, originality, and contribution to the field.
  • Reviewer Recommendations:
      • Referees provide recommendations based on their assessment, which typically fall into categories such as acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
  • Author Revision and Resubmission:
      • Upon receiving the referee reports, authors are notified of the recommendations.
      • If revisions are required, authors are given an opportunity to revise their manuscripts based on the referees' feedback.
      • Authors are typically allowed one round of revisions and resubmission.
  • Final Decision:
      • The editor-in-chief evaluates the revised manuscript and reviews the changes made by the authors.
      • Based on the revisions and recommendations, the editor makes the final decision on acceptance or rejection.
  • Timelines:
    • The review process is time-bound, typically allowing around four weeks for each round of review.

This review process ensures that manuscripts undergo a thorough evaluation by experts in the field, maintaining the integrity and quality of the journal's publications. Additionally, it offers authors the opportunity to enhance their work based on constructive feedback before publication.

 

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Significance: Does the manuscript present a novel and significant advancement in research concerning pedagogy and teaching methods?
  • Review of Literature: Does the manuscript feature a well-structured and analytical review of pertinent literature? Does it employ a coherent and well-developed theoretical or conceptual framework?
  • Research Design: Does the manuscript demonstrate appropriate design and methodology? Is the data and analysis of high quality?
  • Discussion: Does the discussion and conclusion underscore the relevance of the findings for research, policy, and practice?

  Style: Is the manuscript clear, coherent, and succinct? Does it adhere to APA publication guidelines?