Peer review process

Sapiens in Education employs a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, and impact of published works. The journal utilizes a double-blind review system, maintaining anonymity for both authors and reviewers, thereby ensuring a fair, objective, and impartial evaluation.

  1. Initial Editorial Assessment

    All submitted manuscripts undergo a preliminary review by the editorial team. This phase evaluates:

    • Thematic alignment with the journal's objectives and scope.
    • Academic language quality and structural coherence.
    • Presentation of tables, figures, and graphical elements.
    • Text originality via specialized similarity detection (anti-plagiarism) software.

    Authors receive assessment results and a tracking reference number within approximately 72 hours. Manuscripts failing to meet minimum editorial criteria may be rejected or returned for revision and resubmission.

  2. Double-Blind Peer Review

    Manuscripts passing the initial assessment are sent to at least two external subject-matter experts. The evaluation, conducted via a structured double-blind format, considers:

    • Topic relevance to the educational field.
    • Argumentative clarity and coherence.
    • Theoretical grounding and methodological consistency.
    • Originality and contribution to existing knowledge.
    • Appropriate and current use of bibliographic sources.
    • Soundness of analysis and conclusions.

    Reviewers have up to 30 days to provide their decisions. Authors receive an editorial decision report and, if applicable, detailed revision feedback. Revision requests grant authors 8 to 15 days for response and revised manuscript submission, based on required changes.

  3. Editorial Quality Control

    Following peer review and revised manuscript submission, the editorial team conducts a final quality control, including:

    • Grammatical and orthographic review.
    • Verification of compliance with journal guidelines.
    • Confirmation of thematic relevance and policy consistency.

    This phase does not guarantee publication; the Responsible Editor makes the final decision based on editorial priorities, publication volume, and manuscript academic impact.

  4. Editorial Process Timelines

    The average editorial process time, from submission to final decision, is 8 to 12 weeks, varying with article complexity and reviewer availability.

  5. Roles and Confidentiality

    • Academic Editor: Oversees evaluation, assigns reviewers, and ensures scientific standards. Delays prompt author communication.
    • Reviewers: Provide ethical, constructive evaluations within deadlines. Identity remains confidential unless voluntarily disclosed.
    • Reviewer Number: Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two experts; a third may be assigned for conflicting decisions.

  6. Final Editorial Decision

    Based on reviewer reports and the Academic Editor's judgment, authors receive one of the following decisions:

    • Accepted without changes.
    • Minor revision required.
    • Major revision required.
    • Rejected.