Reviewer Guidelines

This journal relies on the expertise and professionalism of its reviewers to maintain the quality, integrity, and rigor of its publications. Reviewers play a critical role in ensuring that manuscripts meet the highest scholarly standards.

These guidelines outline expectations, responsibilities, and the review process for all members of the IJECE reviewer community.

  1. Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review helps ensure that:

  • Manuscripts are original, significant, and methodologically sound.
  • Research findings are clearly presented and contribute to contemporary educational discourse.
  • Ethical standards and academic integrity are consistently upheld.
  1. Confidentiality
  • All manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential documents.
  • Reviewers must not share, discuss, copy, or use any part of the manuscript for personal advantage.
  • The double-blind review process must be respected at all times.
  1. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline assignments when:

  • A personal, academic, financial, or institutional conflict exists.
  • They have collaborated with the author(s) in the past three years.
  • They feel unable to provide an unbiased and objective review.
  • Conflicts must be immediately disclosed to the editorial office.
  1. Review Expectations

Reviewers are expected to provide:

  • Objective, balanced, and constructive feedback
  • Clear comments identifying strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions
  • Professional language and academically grounded critique
  • Recommendations supported by evidence and scholarly reasoning

A review should evaluate the manuscript on the following:

4.1 Quality of Content

  • Originality and contribution to the field
  • Theoretical foundation and clarity of argument
  • Relevance to contemporary educational issues

4.2 Methodological Rigor

  • Appropriateness of methods
  • Accuracy of data analysis
  • Transparency and ethical compliance

4.3 Clarity and Organization

  • Coherence and logical progression
  • Adequacy of literature support
  • Proper structure and adherence to journal format

4.4 Presentation and Technical Accuracy

  • Grammar, clarity, and readability
  • Correct and complete APA 7th Edition referencing
  • Appropriateness of tables, figures, and data illustrations
  1. Review Recommendations

Reviewers must provide one of the following clear decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Resubmit for Review
  • Reject

Detailed comments should accompany every recommendation.

  1. Timeliness
  • Reviews should be completed within the specified timeframe (typically 2–4 weeks).
  • If more time is needed, reviewers must inform the editor immediately.
  • Declining a review promptly helps maintain an efficient editorial workflow.
  1. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers must ensure that the manuscript:

  • Avoids plagiarism, duplication, or data manipulation
  • Includes proper ethical approval for human subject research
  • Maintains respect for confidentiality and responsible reporting
  • If ethical issues are suspected, reviewers must notify the editor confidentially.
  1. Anonymity

IJECE follows a double-blind review system:

  • Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
  • Authors will not know the identity of reviewers.
  • Reviewer comments are anonymized by the editorial team before being shared.
  1. Declining a Review

Reviewers should decline an invitation when:

  • The topic is outside their expertise
  • They cannot meet the deadline
  • A conflict of interest exists
  • Professional courtesy is expected.
  1. Appreciation of Reviewer Service

IJECE acknowledges the essential contribution of its reviewers.
Reviewers may request:

  • Annual reviewer certificates
  • Confirmation letters for academic or professional use
  • Consideration for editorial board membership based on performance and scholarly contribution