Review Guideline

Purpose of Peer Review

The peer review process is a fundamental component of our journal’s commitment to academic excellence. Its primary purpose is to ensure the integrity, quality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts by subjecting them to evaluation by qualified experts in the field. Peer review helps verify the originality, accuracy, and scholarly value of the research, provides constructive feedback for improvement, and supports the editorial team in making fair and informed publication decisions.

1. Role and Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a critical role in ensuring the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing. As a reviewer, you are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
  • Assess the manuscript’s scientific rigor, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
  • Offer clear suggestions for improvement, including strengths, weaknesses, and specific feedback.

2. Before Accepting a Review Invitation

Before agreeing to review a manuscript, please consider:

Expertise

  • Accept the invitation only if the topic matches your field of expertise.
  • If not, promptly decline and suggest suitable alternative reviewers.

Availability

  • Confirm you can complete the review within the requested timeframe (typically two weeks).
  • If you need more time, contact the editor to request an extension or suggest a replacement.

Conflict of Interest

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, personal, etc.) to the editor.
  • A conflict does not automatically disqualify you, but transparency is required.

3. Review Criteria

When reviewing a manuscript, please evaluate the following:

Title and Abstract

  • Is the title clear, specific, and reflective of the study?
  • Does the abstract accurately summarize the key objectives, methods, results, and conclusions?

Introduction

  • Is the problem statement clear?
  • Does the introduction provide appropriate context and relevance?
  • Are the objectives and/or research questions well-defined?

Literature Review

  • Is the literature review current, relevant, and critical?
  • Does it identify gaps the study aims to fill?

Methodology

  • Are the research design and methods clearly explained and appropriate?
  • Is the sampling strategy justified?
  • Are tools, instruments, and procedures adequately described?
  • Are ethical considerations addressed?

Results

  • Are findings presented clearly and logically?
  • Are appropriate statistical or analytical methods used?
  • Are tables and figures clear and relevant?

Discussion and Conclusion

  • Are the results interpreted appropriately and fairly?
  • Are findings compared with previous research?
  • Do the conclusions align with the results?
  • Are the implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research included?

4. Additional Considerations

Originality and Significance

  • Does the paper present original research or a novel perspective?
  • Does it contribute meaningfully to the field?

Scope and Relevance

  • Is the manuscript within the scope of the journal?
  • Is the topic of interest to the journal’s audience?

Language and Clarity

  • Is the manuscript written in clear, coherent, and grammatically correct English?
  • Is the structure logical and easy to follow?

Plagiarism and Ethics

  • Use plagiarism detection tools if needed. Notify the editor if similarity exceeds 20–25% or if you suspect fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism.
  • Do not use content from the manuscript for your own research or share it with others.

5. Reviewer Recommendations

You will be asked to make one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Provide clear justifications for your recommendation. Avoid vague or overly brief comments.

6. Confidentiality and Conduct

  • Keep all manuscript content strictly confidential.
  • Do not discuss the manuscript with colleagues without prior permission from the editor.
  • Do not contact the author directly.
  • Use professional, respectful, and unbiased language in your comments.

7. Comments to Authors and Editors

  • Use the provided review form or system to separate comments to the authors and confidential comments to the editor.
  • Offer constructive feedback, not just criticisms.
  • If needed, recommend references or improvements.

8. Need Help?

For questions, conflicts, or technical issues during the review, please contact the editorial contact of each journals’ principal contacts.

Acknowledgment and Recognition

Reviewers contribute significantly to maintaining scholarly integrity. The journal may offer recognition through:

Education Resources