Peer Review Process

The peer review process at JIES: Journal of Integrated Educational Studies is designed to ensure the quality, integrity, and relevance of the articles published. It is a critical part of the publication process that maintains high academic standards and supports the improvement of submitted manuscripts. Below is a detailed outline of the peer review process.

1. Submission

  • Manuscript Submission: Authors submit their manuscript to JIES via the journal's online submission system. Upon submission, the manuscript is initially checked for compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines and formatting requirements.

  • Initial Screening: The journal’s editorial team conducts an initial screening to assess whether the manuscript fits the scope of the journal, meets the basic quality criteria, and adheres to the journal’s ethical standards. If the manuscript passes this screening, it moves to the next stage. If it does not meet these requirements, it may be rejected at this point.

2. Assignment of Reviewers

  • Selection of Reviewers: Once the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editorial team assigns the manuscript to qualified reviewers who are experts in the relevant field(s) of study. The journal aims to select two or more reviewers for each manuscript to ensure a balanced and thorough evaluation.

  • Reviewer Invitation: Reviewers are invited via email and are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, scientific rigor, methodology, clarity, and contribution to the field. Reviewers are also asked to consider the relevance of the study to the journal’s focus on integrated educational studies.

  • Conflicts of Interest: If a reviewer has a conflict of interest with the authors or the content of the manuscript, they must inform the editorial team and decline the invitation to review the manuscript.

3. Peer Review

  • Double-Blind Review: JIES follows a double-blind peer review process. This means that both the authors and the reviewers are anonymized to ensure impartiality. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based solely on its academic merit and scientific quality, without any bias toward the authors' identities or affiliations.

  • Reviewers' Responsibilities: Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on the following criteria:

    • Originality: Is the research novel and does it contribute new knowledge to the field of integrated educational studies?
    • Quality of Research: Is the methodology appropriate and well-executed? Are the results meaningful and supported by the data?
    • Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript clearly written and logically organized? Does it communicate its ideas effectively?
    • Relevance to the Journal: Does the manuscript align with the scope and focus of the journal, specifically in terms of its interdisciplinary approach to education?
    • Literature Review: Is the manuscript well-grounded in existing research and theory? Are important references cited, and is there an adequate discussion of relevant literature?
    • Contribution to the Field: Does the manuscript address important issues in education and offer meaningful insights, practical implications, or innovative solutions?
    • Ethical Standards: Are ethical considerations, such as plagiarism and consent, addressed appropriately in the manuscript?

  • Reviewers' Feedback: Reviewers are asked to provide constructive feedback, including suggestions for improvement, clarification, or further development. They may recommend revisions, acceptance, or rejection of the manuscript based on their evaluation.

  • Reviewer Recommendations: After completing their review, the reviewers provide a recommendation to the editorial team, which includes one of the following options:

    • Accept without revision: The manuscript is ready for publication as is.
    • Accept with minor revisions: The manuscript requires minor revisions, which can be addressed by the authors without further review.
    • Revise and resubmit: The manuscript requires significant revisions, and the authors should make the necessary changes before resubmitting the manuscript for another round of review.
    • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form and should not be reconsidered.

4. Editorial Decision

  • Editorial Review: The journal’s editorial team, including the editor-in-chief and managing editors, considers the reviewers’ feedback and makes a final decision on the manuscript. The editors may take into account the reviewers' comments, the overall quality of the manuscript, and its alignment with the journal’s focus and scope.

  • Decision Communication: The authors are notified of the decision, along with any feedback or recommendations provided by the reviewers. If revisions are requested, the authors are given a specific timeframe to make the necessary changes and resubmit the manuscript.

  • Revisions: If revisions are required, the authors are expected to address all the reviewers' comments and suggestions in a clear and detailed manner. Authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' feedback.

  • Final Decision: After the authors resubmit the manuscript, the editorial team reviews the revisions and determines whether the manuscript meets the journal’s standards for publication. If the manuscript has been revised appropriately, it may be accepted for publication. If the revisions are insufficient, the manuscript may be rejected.

5. Publication

  • Final Acceptance: Once the manuscript is accepted, it undergoes final copyediting, formatting, and proofreading to ensure consistency with the journal’s style guide.

  • Publication: After final approval, the manuscript is published in the next available issue of JIES. Authors receive a PDF proof of their published article, which they can review before it is officially published online.

6. Ethical Considerations

  • Plagiarism: Manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using plagiarism detection tools. Any manuscript found to have significant issues with plagiarism or unethical authorship practices is immediately rejected.

  • Confidentiality: All manuscripts, reviews, and communications are kept confidential throughout the review process. Reviewers are expected to respect the confidentiality of the materials they evaluate.

  • Conflict of Interest: If any reviewer or editor identifies a potential conflict of interest, they must disclose it immediately, and an alternative reviewer or editor will be assigned.