Peer Review Process

Peer review is an essential component of scholarly publishing, ensuring that each manuscript is evaluated for originality, rigor, and relevance. At the Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, we employ a robust peer review process to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity and intellectual contribution.

Process:
1. Submission and Initial Check: Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary check to ensure it meets basic journal criteria and standards.

2. Reviewer Assignment: Manuscripts that pass the initial check are assigned to expert reviewers. The review model can vary (e.g., single-blind, double-blind, open review) based on the manuscript's nature and author preferences.

3. Review and Evaluation:Reviewers assess the manuscript for originality, scientific significance, clarity, and completeness. They focus on the research question's relevance, methodological soundness, clarity of writing, logical consistency, and the validity of conclusions drawn.

4. Feedback and Revision: Reviewers provide detailed feedback, suggesting improvements or raising concerns. Authors may be asked to revise their manuscript in light of this feedback.

5. Editorial Decision: The editor, considering reviewer feedback and the journal's scope, makes a decision: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, resubmit, or reject.

6. Post-Review Actions: If revisions are required, authors resubmit the revised manuscript, which may undergo further review. Accepted manuscripts proceed to publication.

Guidelines for Reviewers:
- Assess the manuscript objectively and respectfully.
- Provide clear, constructive feedback.
- Highlight strengths and weaknesses.
- Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

For Authors
- Be receptive to feedback and willing to make necessary revisions.
- Respond to reviewer comments thoughtfully and thoroughly.
- Understand that rejection is not final; it's an opportunity to improve and refine your work.

Addressing Reviewers' Comments: 

When responding to reviewers' comments, adhere to the guidelines set forth by Williams (2004):

1. Politeness: Always maintain respect and professionalism in your responses. Avoid confrontational or insulting remarks towards reviewers, editors, or journal publishers. In case of inappropriate reviewer comments, stay focused on the substantive issues.

2. Completeness: Respond to every comment raised by the reviewers. Ensure thoroughness in your replies, demonstrating a willingness to make necessary amendments. In cases of contradictions among reviewers or misunderstandings, address these issues respectfully, without ignoring any points.

3. Evidence-based Responses: When disagreeing with a reviewer, back your arguments with evidence, preferably citing relevant published work to strengthen your case.

For more detailed insights, refer to Williams HC's  article, "How to reply to referees' comments when submitting manuscripts for publication

Benefits of Peer Review:
- Ensures the integrity and quality of published research.
- Provides authors with expert feedback to enhance their work.
- Contributes to the ongoing discourse in the academic community.

Becoming a Reviewer:
Interested scholars can apply to become reviewers. We value diverse perspectives and encourage experts in various fields to contribute to our rigorous review process.