Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Educatum: Jurnal Dunia Pendidikan undergo an initial editorial screening and a double-blind peer-review process to assess their originality, scholarly merit, methodological or conceptual quality, ethical compliance, and contribution to educational research, policy, and practice.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is initially evaluated by the Editorial Team to determine its conformity with the journal's Focus and Scope, Author Guidelines, manuscript template, originality requirements, ethical standards, and basic academic and technical requirements.

The initial screening may include assessment of:

  • relevance to the journal's focus and scope;

  • originality and scholarly contribution;

  • completeness and organization of the manuscript;

  • appropriateness of the research or conceptual approach;

  • compliance with ethical requirements;

  • similarity screening; and

  • conformity with the journal's submission and formatting requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected without external peer review. Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening proceed to the external peer-review stage.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Educatum applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

This system is intended to support an objective, impartial, independent, and academically responsible evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Independent Reviewers

Each manuscript that proceeds to external review is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on criteria that include:

  • originality and novelty;

  • relevance to the journal's focus and scope;

  • scholarly significance and contribution to educational knowledge;

  • clarity of research objectives or scholarly arguments;

  • appropriateness and rigor of the methodology or conceptual framework;

  • validity and quality of data analysis and interpretation;

  • coherence between results, discussion, and conclusions;

  • relevance and adequacy of scholarly references;

  • clarity, organization, and academic quality of presentation;

  • ethical compliance and research integrity; and

  • theoretical, practical, or policy implications for education.

For review articles and conceptual papers, reviewers assess the clarity of the review or conceptual approach, relevance and adequacy of the literature, strength of theoretical argumentation, originality of synthesis, and contribution to educational scholarship.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and sufficiently detailed comments to assist editors in making editorial decisions and to help authors improve the scholarly quality of their manuscripts.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect their objectivity.

A reviewer should decline the review assignment when personal, professional, financial, institutional, collaborative, competitive, or other relationships may reasonably create a conflict of interest.

Editors are responsible for selecting reviewers with appropriate expertise and for maintaining the independence and integrity of the peer-review process.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' evaluations and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revision

  • Major Revision

  • Reject

Authors receiving a revision decision are expected to address the reviewers' and editors' comments carefully and submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to the comments within the specified timeframe.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not automatically guarantee acceptance. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated further by the editors when necessary.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into consideration the reviewers' recommendations, the quality of the revised manuscript, its scholarly contribution, ethical compliance, and conformity with the journal's editorial policies.

Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts, peer-review reports, editorial correspondence, and related materials are treated as confidential.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, discuss, copy, or use unpublished information contained in submitted manuscripts for personal, academic, professional, financial, or commercial advantage.

Reviewer identities remain confidential in accordance with Educatum's double-blind peer-review policy.

Research Integrity and Ethical Review

Reviewers should notify the editor when they identify suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, fabricated or falsified data, ethical concerns involving research participants, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other indications of publication misconduct.

The peer-review process is conducted in accordance with Educatum's Publication Ethics, Plagiarism Policy, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy, and is guided by relevant principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and internationally recognized standards of responsible scholarly publishing.

All editorial decisions are based on the scholarly merit, relevance, methodological or conceptual quality, ethical compliance, and contribution of the manuscript and are made independently of the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religious or political views, financial status, or other characteristics unrelated to the academic quality of the work.