Peer review process
Educational Research & Implementation (EduRE) applies a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to support scholarly quality, fairness, and research integrity. In this model, authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another throughout the review process.
1. Initial Submission and Technical Check
Manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission system using the official submission requirements and templates where applicable. At the initial stage, the editorial office conducts a technical check to confirm compliance with the journal’s formal requirements, including file completeness, anonymization, formatting, and adherence to submission instructions. Scientific merit is not assessed at this stage.
2. Editor-in-Chief Screening (Desk Review)
After the technical check, the Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript for fit with the journal’s scope, originality, ethical compliance, and potential scholarly contribution. Manuscripts that fall outside the scope of the journal or do not meet minimum academic or ethical standards may be desk-rejected without external review. Suitable manuscripts may be assigned to a Handling Editor.
3. Research Integrity and Similarity Screening
EduRE may conduct research integrity checks before or during peer review. These may include similarity screening (e.g., iThenticate) and assessment of potential ethical concerns such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, authorship irregularities, or other integrity-related issues. Manuscripts with serious concerns may be returned, rejected, or investigated further in accordance with journal policy.
4. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
The Handling Editor invites independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. A minimum of two external reviewers is normally required for a standard evaluation. Reviewers are selected based on expertise, independence, and the absence of conflicts of interest. Invited reviewers are generally asked to respond to the invitation within 7 days.
5. Double-Blind Peer Review
Reviewers who accept the invitation are normally given up to 30 days to complete their review. They are asked to provide constructive, evidence-based, and reasoned feedback, together with a recommendation such as Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Reviewer recommendations are advisory; final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the journal.
6. Editorial Evaluation and First Decision
The Handling Editor and Editor-in-Chief evaluate the reviewer reports and the manuscript as a whole before reaching an editorial decision. When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the journal may seek an additional independent review. EduRE aims to provide an initial editorial decision within 45 days of submission, although actual timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.
7. Revision and Re-Review
If revision is requested, authors are normally given 20 days to submit a revised manuscript and a detailed Response to Reviewers document explaining how each point was addressed. Revised manuscripts may be evaluated by the editor alone or returned to one or more reviewers for further assessment, particularly in cases of major revision.
8. Editorial Conflicts of Interest
Editors must declare any conflicts of interest. Where an editor has a personal, institutional, financial, or collaborative conflict related to a submission, that editor will recuse themselves from the review and decision process, and the manuscript will be reassigned to another appropriate editor.
9. Final Decision and Production
Once reviewer concerns have been adequately addressed and the manuscript satisfies the journal’s academic, ethical, and editorial standards, a final decision is made. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, and proofreading before publication. The final version of record is then published online with its assigned DOI.
For full procedural and ethical details, please see the journal’s Peer Review Policy and related editorial policies.
