Peer Review Process

Journal of Learning and Educational Innovation (JLEI)

The Journal of Learning and Educational Innovation (JLEI) employs a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and scholarly contribution of all published manuscripts.

Under this review model, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This approach promotes impartiality, objectivity, and fairness in manuscript evaluation.

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated based on their originality, methodological rigor, theoretical contribution, practical significance, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

The average review process typically requires between 6 and 12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability, manuscript quality, and the extent of revisions required.

Editorial and Peer Review Workflow

1. Initial Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.

The submission must comply with the journal's author guidelines, manuscript template, ethical standards, and submission requirements.

2. Preliminary Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor conducts an initial evaluation to assess:

Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
Compliance with submission guidelines
Originality and scholarly quality
Academic writing standards
Ethical compliance

At this stage, manuscripts may be desk-rejected if they are outside the journal scope, fail to meet minimum academic standards, or violate ethical requirements.

3. Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software before entering the peer review process.

Manuscripts showing evidence of plagiarism, duplicate publication, or excessive similarity may be rejected or returned to the authors for clarification.

4. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript topic.

The journal applies a Double-Blind Peer Review system in which:
Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, academic qualifications, publication records, and the absence of conflicts of interest.

5. Peer Review Evaluation

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to the following criteria:
Originality and novelty
Relevance to the field of learning and educational innovation
Theoretical foundation
Methodological rigor
Data quality and analysis
Clarity and organization of presentation
Quality of discussion and conclusions
Contribution to educational research, policy, and practice
Quality and relevance of references

Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations for both authors and editors.

6. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

Accept

The manuscript is accepted for publication with no further revisions or only minor editorial adjustments.

Minor Revision

The manuscript requires limited revisions before final acceptance.

Major Revision

The manuscript requires substantial revisions and may be subject to an additional round of peer review.

Reject

The manuscript does not meet the journal's publication standards or falls outside the journal's scope.

The Editor-in-Chief has final authority over all publication decisions.

7. Author Revision

Authors receiving revision requests are expected to:
Revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments.
Submit a detailed response letter explaining how each comment has been addressed.
Resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified deadline.

Failure to submit revisions within the required timeframe may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

8. Final Acceptance

Once the manuscript satisfies the editorial and reviewer requirements, a formal acceptance decision is issued.

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage.

9. Production and Publication

Following acceptance, manuscripts undergo:
Copyediting
Language editing (if necessary)
Layout editing and typesetting
Proofreading
Final publication

The final version of the article is published online and assigned a DOI where applicable.

Review Principles

JLEI is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, and ethical review process based on the following principles:

Confidentiality

All manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential documents.

Objectivity

Review decisions are based solely on academic merit, scholarly contribution, methodological quality, and relevance to the journal.

Independence

Editors and reviewers must perform their duties independently and free from external influence.

Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when impartial evaluation cannot be guaranteed.

Ethical Integrity

The journal follows the ethical principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding or procedural error may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief.

Appeals will be evaluated independently, and the journal reserves the right to seek additional expert opinions before issuing a final decision.