Peer Reviewers

Upon successfully passing the editorial review, the management of the process is handled by one of the Co-Editors or Associate Editors. Each manuscript is sent to two reviewers to determine whether it is suitable for publication in the journal. A double-blind peer review process begins as the reviewers anonymously evaluate the manuscript based on the the clarity of the purpose, novelty of the issue addressed, literature review and theoretical framework, research design/methodology, presentation, fluency and consistency of the findings, quality of discussion, implications for learning, teaching and future studies, and originality. The reviewers give scientific valuable comments improving the contents of the manuscript.

Once the manuscripts have been reviewed, the subsequent course of action is determined based on the reviewers' recommendations, which can include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. For manuscripts designated for minor revision, they will be accepted once the authors resubmit the revised version following the review. In contrast, manuscripts requiring major revision will need to undergo a second round of revision after the authors submit a significantly altered version that addresses the requested changes. Notifications regarding the review outcomes will be sent to the authors no later than two weeks after the manuscript has been reviewed by the reviewers.