All manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a rigorous peer-review process, beginning with an initial editorial screening that assesses the manuscript’s formatting, originality, and language quality. Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are evaluated by two independent reviewers. In cases of conflicting reviewer reports, the manuscript is referred to a third reviewer. The final publication decision is made by the editors based on the outcomes of peer-review process.
For manuscripts to be considered for the peer-review process, submissions must be original, unpublished, or not under consideration of publishing elsewhere, and prepared in accordance with the journal’s Submission Guidelines.
Journal of Research in Education and Teaching (JRET) employs a rigorous three-stage editorial and peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scholarly contribution of all published manuscripts.
Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the JRET editorial office to determine its appropriateness for the journal prior to the peer-review process. At this stage, the manuscript is assessed according to the following criteria:
Alignment with the journal’s aims and scope
Originality and plagiarism compliance (similarity index below 15%)
Language quality and academic writing proficiency
Adequacy, relevance, and currency of references
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the author(s) without proceeding to peer review.
Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are advanced to the double-blind peer-review stage. In this process, both the identities of the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent external reviewers with relevant scholarly expertise.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide constructive feedback aimed at improving its academic quality. Specifically, manuscripts are assessed based on:
Originality
Contribution to the field of educational leadership
Technical and methodological quality
Clarity of presentation
Depth and rigor of research
Based on their evaluation, reviewers recommend one of the following decisions:
Accept without revision
Accept with minor revisions
Accept with moderate revisions
Accept with major revisions
Reject (not suitable for further consideration)
After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the editorial office examines all comments and recommendations. In cases where there is substantial disagreement between reviewers, the manuscript may be sent to a third reviewer for additional evaluation.
The peer-review process typically takes between one to three months, depending on the complexity of the review. Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ and editors’ feedback and resubmit the revised version.
Upon receiving the revised manuscript, a final evaluation is conducted. Taking into account the revised submission and all reviewer feedback, the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding publication.