For Reviewers
Reviewer Guidelines and Evaluation Criteria
Peer review is vital to maintaining the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing. Journal of Emerging Educational Studies (JEES) deeply appreciates the time and expertise that international reviewers dedicate to evaluating submitted manuscripts.
JEES operates a strict double-blind peer-review process. To ensure impartiality, the identities of both authors and reviewers are completely concealed throughout the evaluation. All interactions, report submissions, and decisions are managed securely through our online journal system.
1. Initial Steps Upon Receiving a Review Invitation
When invited to review a manuscript, please log in to the journal system and respond promptly (Accept or Decline) based on the following considerations:
- Expertise: Does the manuscript align with your specific research area and methodological expertise?
- Availability: Can you complete the review within the requested timeframe (typically 3 to 4 weeks)? If you need a short extension, please contact the editor immediately.
- Conflict of Interest: Do you have any personal, professional, or financial connection with the research or the authors (if guessed)? If yes, please decline the invitation or notify the editor.
2. Core Scientific Evaluation Criteria
When conducting your review and completing the JEES Peer Review Form, we ask you to evaluate the manuscript based on the following structural dimensions:
| Evaluation Dimension | Key Questions to Consider |
|---|---|
| Originality & Significance | Does the study offer an innovative perspective? Does it fit the "Emerging" scope of the journal? Is the research question significant for global educational science? |
| Theoretical Framework | Is the literature review comprehensive and up-to-date? Are the conceptual definitions clearly articulated? |
| Methodological Rigor | Is the research design (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed) appropriate? Is the sample/participants well-defined? Are data collection instruments and statistical analyses (e.g., SEM, CFA, thematic analysis) robust and correct? |
| Findings & Discussion | Are the results clearly presented and supported by data? Does the discussion connect the findings back to the broader literature? |
| Educational Implications | Does the paper provide actionable and clear implications for educational practice, pedagogy, or policy? |
| Language and Layout | Is the manuscript written in clear, academic English (or Turkish)? Is the text concise and logically structured according to APA style guidelines? |
3. Tone and Style of Feedback
- Constructive Criticism: Please ensure your feedback is helpful, objective, and respectful. Avoid defamatory, personal, or insulting remarks. Focus on helping the authors improve their work.
- Specific Recommendations: Instead of general statements like "the methodology is weak," please provide specific guidance (e.g., "The authors should clarify their sampling strategy and provide reliability scores for the scale used").
4. Confidentiality and Post-Review Duty
All manuscripts sent for review are privileged and confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or utilize any unpublished data or ideas from the manuscript for personal or professional gain. After the review process is completed, all digital copies of the manuscript must be safely deleted from your local devices.
