Peer-Review Policy

Journal Content: 

J-EDUCAT(e-ISSN: 3023-8145) is a peer-reviewed and open accsess  online journal. Contributions for all journals may include research papers, case studies, tutorials, courseware experiences, evaluations, review papers, and viewpoints. J-EDUCAT (e-ISSN: 3023-8145) invites proposals on all topics related to the use of education, instruction, learning and knowledge about new education including:

• Child Development and Education
• Computer Education and Instructional Technology
• Counseling Psychology
• Curriculum and Instruction
• Democracy and Human Rights Education
• Distance Education
• Early Childhood Education
• Educational Administration
• Educational Measurement and Evaluation
• Educational Psychology
• Educational Policy Studies
• Educational Sociology
• Elementary Education
• Engineering Education
• Environmental Education
• EU Education Programs
• Fine Arts Education
• Foreign Languages Education
• Health Education
• Higher Education
• History of Education
• Innovation and Change in Education
• Instructional Technologies
• Law and Education
• Management Education
• Mathematics Education
• Media Literacy and Education
• Philosophy of Education and Pedagogy of Human Love
• Physical Training and Sports Education
• Public Education and Life Long Learning
• Religious Education
• Science Education
• Special Education
• Social Studies Education
• Teacher Education
• Technical and Vocational Education
• Technology Education
• Tourism and Education
• Turkish Education 

General Guidelines and Submission Evaluation Criteria

Materials must be original, scientifically accurate, and coherent. The manuscript should be informative, summarizing the basic facts and conclusions, and maintaining a coherence and unity of thought having:

1. Value or usefulness to field or profession,
2. Adequacy of design and accuracy of analysis,
3. Presentation and interpretation of findings, discussion and conclusions,
4. Inclusion of appropriate implications for practice and policy,
5. Overall clarity of ideas and expression,
6. Significance,
7. Consistent with existing literature,
8. References to relevant existing work, and
9. Grammatical construction; writing style; use of non-sexist language.

The Review Process

All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review (although these decisions may be based on informal advice from specialists in the field).

Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to one or two reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice.

Selecting Peer-Reviewers

Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. For instance, we avoid using people who are slow, careless, or do not provide reasoning for their views, whether harsh or lenient.

We check with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review. Reviewers should bear in mind that these messages contain confidential information, which should be treated as such.

Writing the Review

The primary purpose for the review is to provide the editors with the information needed to reach a decision. The review should also instruct the authors as to how they can strengthen their paper to the point where it may be acceptable. As far as possible, a negative review should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that rejected authors can understand the basis for the decision and see in broad terms what needs to be done to improve the manuscript. This is secondary to the other functions, however, and referees should not feel obliged to provide detailed, constructive advice to the authors of papers that do not meet the criteria for the journal (as outlined in the letter from the editor when asking for the review). If the reviewer believes that a manuscript would not be suitable for publication, his/her report to the author should be as brief as is consistent with enabling the author to understand the reason for the decision.

Anonymity

We do not release reviewers' identities to authors or to other reviewers, except when reviewers specifically ask to be identified. Unless they feel so strongly, however, we prefer that reviewers should remain anonymous throughout the review process and beyond.

Peer-Review Publication Policies

All contributions submitted to the J-EDUCAT (e-ISSN: 3023-8145)that are selected for peer-review are sent to at least one - but usually two or more - independent reviewers, selected by the editors. Authors are welcome to suggest suitable independent reviewers and may also request that the journal excludes one or two individuals or laboratories. The journal sympathetically considers such requests and usually honors them, but the editor's decision on the choice of referees is final.

Ethics and Security

Journal of Educational Studies (J-EDUCAT) (e-ISSN: 3023-8145) editors and publishing board may seek advice about submitted papers not only from technical reviewers but also on any aspect of a paper that raises concerns. These may include, for example, ethical issues or issues of access to data or materials. Very occasionally, concerns may also relate to the implications to society of publishing a paper, including threats to security. In such circumstances, advice will usually be sought simultaneously with the technical peer-review process. As in all publishing decisions, the ultimate decision as to whether to publish is the responsibility of the editor of the journal concerned.