Peer review process
Educational Research & Implementation (EduRE) employs a strict double-blind peer-review process to ensure high standards of scientific quality and research integrity.
1. Initial Submission, Template, and Anonymization Check
The corresponding author submits the manuscript via the journal’s online system using the official manuscript template (mandatory). Authors must upload a blinded manuscript (i.e., no author names, affiliations, acknowledgements, self-identifying statements, or identifying file properties/metadata). The editorial office conducts an initial technical check to ensure strict compliance with the Author Guidelines, including formatting, completeness, and anonymization. Scientific content is not assessed at this stage.
2. Editor-in-Chief Screening (Desk Review)
The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript for alignment with the journal’s scope, originality, ethical compliance, and potential scholarly contribution. Manuscripts that do not meet basic quality standards or fall outside the scope may be desk-rejected at this stage. If deemed suitable, the manuscript is assigned to a Handling Editor.
3. Ethics, Research Integrity, and Similarity Screening
EduRE is committed to ethical publishing. Submissions may undergo similarity screening (i-Thenticate) and are checked for compliance with the journal’s research ethics policies. Manuscripts with serious ethical concerns may be rejected prior to peer review.
4. Reviewer Assignment
The Handling Editor identifies and invites independent, external experts in the relevant field. A minimum of two reviewers is required for a standard evaluation. Reviewers are given 7 days to accept or decline the invitation based on expertise, availability, and potential conflicts of interest.
5. The Double-Blind Review Stage
Upon accepting the invitation, reviewers are normally granted 30 days to evaluate the manuscript. Reviewers provide a detailed, reasoned report along with a recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject). Additional time may be granted upon reasonable request.
6. Editorial Decision (Target Timeline)
Peer review is a qualitative process. The Handling Editor evaluates reviewer reports and recommendations to make a comprehensive editorial decision. If reports conflict substantially, an additional independent reviewer may be invited. EduRE aims to provide an initial editorial decision within 45 days of submission. The decision (together with anonymized reviewer feedback) is communicated to the author.
7. Revision Cycle and Re-Review
If revisions are required, authors are given 20 days to address the feedback. Authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed Response to Reviewers document, indicating how and where each comment was addressed. If authors disagree with a reviewer comment, they must provide a clear scientific justification.
Depending on the extent of revisions (especially for Major Revisions), the revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for additional rounds of evaluation (typically allowing reviewers up to 30 days per round).
8. Editorial Conflicts of Interest (COI)
Editors are required to declare conflicts of interest. If an editor has a conflict (e.g., personal, institutional, or collaborative relationship with the authors), the editor will recuse themselves, and the manuscript will be handled by another editor to ensure an impartial review process.
9. Final Decision and Production
Once reviewer concerns are satisfactorily addressed and the manuscript meets the journal’s standards, a final decision is made by the Handling Editor and Editor-in-Chief. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting and layout. The formatted article is sent to the author for final proofreading and approval before being published online with a designated DOI.
