Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewer Guidelines
Educational Review: Research and Innovation (ERRI)
Educational Review: Research and Innovation (ERRI) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly excellence, research integrity, and ethical publishing. Peer reviewers play a fundamental role in safeguarding the quality, credibility, and academic value of the journal. These Reviewer Guidelines outline the responsibilities, expectations, ethical principles, and evaluation criteria expected of all reviewers participating in the journal's double-blind peer review process.
1. Roles and Responsibilities of Reviewers
| Role | Description |
|---|---|
| Academic Evaluator | Assess the originality, scholarly significance, methodological rigor, and overall quality of submitted manuscripts to ensure that only high-quality research is published. |
| Constructive Mentor | Provide objective, respectful, and constructive comments that assist authors in improving their manuscripts regardless of the editorial recommendation. |
| Ethical Guardian | Identify possible ethical concerns, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, unethical research practices, or inappropriate citations. |
| Confidential Reviewer | Maintain complete confidentiality regarding all submitted manuscripts and related communications. |
| Professional Contributor | Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe and communicate promptly with the editorial office when delays occur. |
2. Subject Expertise and Ethical Conduct
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in educational research and related disciplines covered by ERRI, including but not limited to:
- Educational Research
- Educational Innovation
- Curriculum and Instruction
- Educational Technology
- STEM Education
- Language and Literacy Education
- Social Sciences Education
- Humanities Education
- Early Childhood Education
- Higher Education
- Vocational Education
- Educational Leadership and Policy
- Educational Psychology
- Assessment and Evaluation
All manuscripts are reviewed using a double-blind peer review process in which both author and reviewer identities remain anonymous.
Reviewers are expected to:
- Disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest.
- Decline review invitations outside their area of expertise.
- Maintain professional, objective, and respectful language throughout the review process.
- Evaluate manuscripts solely on academic merit without discrimination.
3. Review Criteria
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts according to the following scholarly criteria:
| Evaluation Criterion | Description |
|---|---|
| Relevance to Journal Scope | Alignment with the aims and scope of Educational Review: Research and Innovation (ERRI). |
| Originality and Innovation | Novelty, significance, and contribution to educational knowledge and practice. |
| Research Quality | Methodological rigor, validity, reliability, and sound research design. |
| Literature Review | Use of current, relevant, and authoritative scholarly literature. |
| Organization and Clarity | Logical structure, coherence, readability, and academic writing quality. |
| Data Analysis | Appropriate analytical methods and interpretation of findings. |
| Educational Contribution | Potential impact on educational theory, policy, or practice. |
| Ethical Compliance | Compliance with research ethics and publication ethics. |
4. Manuscript Annotation
Reviewers are strongly encouraged to provide annotations directly within the manuscript using PDF or DOCX commenting tools whenever appropriate. Such annotations improve communication with authors and facilitate manuscript revision.
Suggested annotations may include:
- Requests for clarification.
- Suggestions for improving language and academic style.
- Recommendations for additional literature.
- Identification of inconsistencies or unsupported claims.
- Corrections of methodological or analytical issues.
5. Reviewer Evaluation Form
Reviewers complete the journal's structured online evaluation form consisting of:
- Quantitative scores for each evaluation criterion.
- Constructive comments for authors.
- Confidential comments intended only for the Editor-in-Chief.
- Ethical concerns, if applicable.
6. Editorial Recommendations
Reviewers should recommend one of the following editorial decisions:
| Recommendation | Description |
|---|---|
| Accept | The manuscript is suitable for publication with no or only very minor editorial changes. |
| Minor Revision | Publication is recommended after minor improvements. |
| Major Revision | Substantial revisions are required before further consideration. |
| Reject | The manuscript does not meet the journal's scholarly standards or falls outside its scope. |
Recommendations should always be supported by clear, evidence-based comments and specific references to the manuscript.
7. Review Timeline
To ensure timely publication, reviewers are requested to follow the journal's standard review schedule.
| Editorial Activity | Expected Time |
|---|---|
| Invitation Response | Within 7 days |
| Peer Review Completion | 4–6 weeks |
| Revision Review (if required) | 2–3 weeks |
Reviewers who are unable to complete their review within the agreed timeframe are encouraged to notify the editorial office as soon as possible.
8. Confidentiality and Anonymity
Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process. Manuscripts, research findings, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence must not be shared, discussed, cited, or used for personal research before publication.
Reviewers should never attempt to identify the authors or disclose their own identity during the review process.
9. Publication Ethics
ERRI follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. Reviewers are expected to report any suspected cases of:
- Plagiarism.
- Duplicate publication.
- Data fabrication or falsification.
- Image manipulation.
- Unethical research involving human participants.
- Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
10. Editorial Communication
Questions concerning reviewer responsibilities, publication ethics, or the review process may be directed to the Editorial Office through the journal's official communication channels available on the journal website.
11. Acknowledgment
The Editorial Board of Educational Review: Research and Innovation (ERRI) sincerely appreciates the valuable contributions of its reviewers. Their expertise, professionalism, and commitment to scholarly excellence are fundamental to maintaining the quality, credibility, and international reputation of the journal. Through their voluntary service, reviewers contribute significantly to advancing educational research and innovation worldwide.
Educational Review: Research and Innovation (ERRI)
Promoting Excellence, Integrity, and Innovation through Rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review.
