Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts to Educational Research Review and Practice (ERRP) undergo a double-blind peer review process to ensure academic quality, originality, and contribution to the field of education.

Review Stages:

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    The editorial team checks whether the manuscript fits the journal’s scope, formatting guidelines, and submission completeness. Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be rejected without peer review.

  2. Double-Blind Peer Review
    Suitable manuscripts are assigned to two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

    • Both author and reviewer identities are kept anonymous.

    • Reviewers evaluate originality, relevance, methodology, clarity, and scholarly contribution.

  3. Reviewer Recommendations
    Reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:

    • Accept without revision

    • Accept with minor revision

    • Major revision required

    • Reject

  4. Editorial Decision
    The editor makes the final decision based on reviewers’ feedback, which can be:

    • Accepted

    • Revision required (minor or major)

    • Rejected

  5. Revision by Authors
    Authors are given time to revise their manuscript based on reviewer feedback. The revised version may be re-evaluated by the editor or sent back to reviewers.

  6. Final Editing and Publication
    Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting and is scheduled for publication in the appropriate issue.

Review Timeline

The average review process takes 4–8 weeks, depending on reviewer and author response time.

Review Ethics

All reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, objectivity, and disclose any conflict of interest regarding the manuscript.