e-ISSN 2709-7986 (online)
The procedure for reviewing manuscripts of articles in the journal "Educational Challenges"
NOTE: Download the standard form template (pdf).
- The purpose of reviewing (expert evaluation) manuscripts of scientific articles is to maintain a high scientific, theoretical, and practical level of the journal "Educational Challenges" and to select the most valuable and relevant scientific papers..
- The journal "Educational Challenges" uses Double-Blind Peer Review:
- the reviewer does not know the personal information of the author/authors;
- the author/authors do not know the personal data of the reviewer. The scientific articles submitted undergo initial control first by technical support regarding the completeness and correctness of their registration and compliance with the Manuscript Requirements set out on the site in the section ‘Author Guideline’.
- The manuscript is first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to ensure that it meets the basic requirements for publication in the journal, such as relevance to the journal's scope, adherence to ethical guidelines, and compliance with the journal's formatting and style guidelines.
- Once the manuscript has passed the initial screening, it is assigned to two reviewers who have expertise and competence in the relevant field of study (article). The Reviewers are selected based on their academic credentials and experience, as well as their availability to complete the review within the specified timeframe. The Editor-in-Chief (or Deputy Editor) determines the Reviewer from the reviewers’ bank who oversees the relevant scientific direction for the article or in the disputable issue. Reviewers should be known experts in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript and have published in the field of research (preferably during the last 5 years).
- The Reviewers are provided with a set of guidelines that outline the criteria for evaluating the manuscript, such as originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and validity of the results. The reviewers are also asked to provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improving the manuscript.
- The Reviewers are given a deadline for submitting their review, typically 4-6 weeks from the date of assignment. In some cases, the reviewers may request an extension if they need more time to complete the review.
- Once both reviews have been received, the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor evaluates the comments and feedback provided by the Reviewers and makes a decision about the manuscript.
- After an expert evaluation of a scientific article, the Reviewer may:
- Accept without revision;
- Accept after minor revision;
- Reconsider after major revision;
- Reject, especially because it does not fit the criteria outlined above of originality, importance to the field, interest, or sound methodology.
The Reviewer may give Specific Reviewer Comments and Suggestions: If the Reviewer rejects the article, the Reviewer must state the reason for the decision. The editor recommends using the developed standard review form, which is available on the site's website when reviewing.
- When reviewing articles Reviewers must:
- pay special attention to the urgency of the scientific problem raised in the article;
- characterize the theoretical and applied value of the performed research;
- correctness of the given mathematical calculations, graphs, and drawings;
- assess how the author's conclusions are linked with the study purpose, and relate to existing scientific concepts;
- adherence by the authors of the rules of scientific ethics, and correctness of references to literary sources.
The necessary element of the review should be the reviewer's assessment of the author's personal contribution to solving the problem under consideration.
It is advisable to note in the reviews the conformity of style, logic and availability of scientific teaching, as well as make conclusions about the authenticity and validity of conclusions of the author (authors) in this article.
- If revisions are required, the Author is notified and given a deadline for submitting a revised version of the manuscript. The revised manuscript is then sent back to the original Reviewers for a second round of review, along with a response letter that addresses their comments and suggestions.
- After the second round of review, the Editor-in-Chief (or Deputy Editor) or an Associate Editor evaluates the revised manuscript and the Reviewers' comments and makes a final decision about publication.
- The Editorial Office sends copies of reviews to the Author(s) (unnamed, so as not to disclose the data of the reviewer) or the reasoned refusal of the Editorial Office to publish this particular manuscript.
- The Author is notified of the decision, and if the manuscript is accepted for publication, it is forwarded to the production team for copyediting etc.
- The Author receives page proofs for final review and approval before publication.
- Once published, the article is freely available to readers through the journal’s website and other platforms, subject to the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license. You can find more information about it in the section 'For Author' - 'Copyright and Licensing'.
In general, the expected time from submission of an article to acceptance for publication is an average of 6 weeks. This period includes the initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief (or Deputy Editor) and Technical Editor, review by two Reviewers, and, if necessary, a period for the author to revise the manuscript after receiving the reviewers' comments and suggestions.
However, it's worth noting that the review process timeline can vary depending on a variety of factors, such as the complexity of the topic, the availability of reviewers, and the number of revisions required. It's always a good idea to check the specific guidelines and timelines provided by the journal when submitting an article to ensure that you have a clear understanding of the expected timeline for the review process.
Additionally, authors should note that "Educational Challenges" publishes twice a year in April and October. Therefore, the time period from acceptance of an article for publication to its actual publication on the journal's website will depend on when the author submits the manuscript to the Editorial Board, either via email or through the submission form on the journal's website.