About Journal About the Journal Aim & Scope Editorial Team Contact
Current Archives
For Author Submissions Publication Ethics Plagiarism & AI Policy Privacy Statement Conflict of Interest Article Processing Charges Peer Review Process Open Access & Copyright Policy Journal Archiving Policy Advertising Policy
Indexing

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The Global Journal of Education (GJE) employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation. This approach maintains impartiality and ensures that decisions are based solely on the quality, originality, and relevance of the research.

Review Steps

  1. Initial Editorial Screening

    • Every submitted manuscript is first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief to ensure it meets the journal’s scope, formatting requirements, and minimum quality standards.

    • Manuscripts that do not comply may be returned to the author(s) for revision prior to peer review or rejected at this stage.

  2. Reviewer Selection

    • If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it is sent to two independent subject-expert reviewers selected from the journal’s reviewer database or external academic networks.

    • Reviewers are chosen for their expertise in the relevant field of education and related disciplines.

  3. Double-Blind Review

    • Authors’ identifying details are removed before the manuscript is sent to reviewers.

    • Reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to the authors.

    • Reviewers’ comments to the editors are confidential; comments to authors are anonymized before being shared.

  4. Evaluation Criteria
    Reviewers assess manuscripts on:

    • Originality and significance of the research

    • Relevance to the field of education

    • Research design and methodology

    • Quality and clarity of writing

    • Validity of results and conclusions

    • Contribution to knowledge and practice

  5. Reviewer Recommendations
    Reviewers may recommend one of the following outcomes:

    • Accept without revision

    • Accept with minor revisions

    • Accept after major revisions (with possible re-review)

    • Reject

  6. Handling Disagreements

    • If the two reviewers provide significantly conflicting recommendations, the editor may seek input from an additional reviewer before making a final decision.

  7. Final Decision

    • The Editor-in-Chief, taking into account reviewers’ feedback, makes the final decision on the manuscript.

    • Authors receive a decision letter along with anonymized reviewer comments.

    • Acceptance after major revisions depends on the author’s ability to address reviewer concerns satisfactorily.

Ethical Compliance

GJE follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to ensure fairness, transparency, and academic integrity in the peer review process.


Archive