Peer Review Process

International Journal of Education and Learning Studies (IJELS) implements an independent, confidential, fair, and rigorous peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, methodological validity, and ethical integrity of published research and review articles.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Every manuscript undergoes preliminary assessment by the editorial team, normally within 7–14 days. This includes:

• Relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
• Originality and scholarly contribution.
• Methodological appropriateness and academic quality.
• Compliance with manuscript structure and Author Guidelines.
• Completeness of the Cover Letter, Title Page, and Anonymous Manuscript.
• Compliance with publication ethics and required declarations.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy the journal's essential academic or ethical requirements may be rejected without external review.

2. Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

Manuscripts are screened for textual similarity using appropriate software. IJELS normally applies an internal similarity screening threshold of 20%, subject to relevant exclusions and qualitative editorial evaluation.

Editors assess the nature, sources, and context of overlap. The similarity percentage alone does not establish or exclude plagiarism.

3. Reviewer Assignment

Reviewers are selected according to subject expertise, methodological competence, publication experience, independence, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest.

Under the policy effective from Volume 2, Issue 3 (2026), four independent external review reports are required before a manuscript can be accepted. Additional reviewers may be consulted when necessary.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Originality, novelty, and scholarly significance.
• Relevance to education and learning studies.
• Clarity of objectives and theoretical framework.
• Research design, methods, and analytical rigor.
• Reliability and interpretation of findings.
• Critical discussion and scholarly contribution.
• Quality and accuracy of references.
• Research and publication ethics.

Review articles are additionally evaluated for transparency of literature selection, analytical procedures, synthesis, and contribution to existing knowledge.

5. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor and is not determined solely by a majority vote.

6. Author Revision and Re-evaluation

Authors must respond to reviewer comments through a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response. Substantive changes should be clearly indicated.

Revised manuscripts may undergo another round of review. Submission of revisions does not guarantee acceptance.

7. Editorial Independence and Confidentiality

Reviewers and editors must disclose conflicts of interest, maintain manuscript confidentiality, and avoid unauthorized use or disclosure of unpublished research.

Editors with relevant conflicts must recuse themselves. Acceptance decisions remain independent of author fees, institutional relationships, and commercial interests.

8. Final Decision and Publication

Following review and revision, the Editor-in-Chief or authorized editor makes the final decision. Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, metadata verification, proofreading, and publication preparation.

Editorial reports, revision histories, and decisions are documented through the journal's manuscript-management procedures.

9. Editorial Timeline

The complete editorial process generally takes approximately 8–12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability, revision requirements, and manuscript complexity. This period is an estimate rather than a guaranteed deadline.

10. Peer Review Workflow