01
EDITORIAL CHECK Initial Stage
Initial Manuscript Screening
The editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript is relevant to the journal's scope and meets basic submission requirements.
Peer Review Process
EDITORIAL QUALITY CONTROL
Peer Review Process
The Journal of Science, Mathematics and Educational Innovation applies a structured peer-review process to evaluate the scholarly quality, relevance, originality, and contribution of submitted manuscripts.
Review Model Double-Blind Peer Review
JSMEI Quality Through
Peer Review Evaluate · Improve · Decide
Peer Review Evaluate · Improve · Decide
01
REVIEW PRINCIPLE
Double-Blind Review
JSMEI uses a double-blind peer-review model. The identity of the author is not disclosed to reviewers, and the identity of reviewers is not disclosed to the author during the review process.
This model is intended to support an objective and academically focused evaluation of the submitted manuscript.
REVIEW WORKFLOW
6 Stages From Submission to Editorial Decision
02
REVIEW PREPARATION Reviewer Selection
Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to reviewers whose academic expertise is relevant to the subject and methodological approach of the manuscript.
03
DOUBLE-BLIND REVIEW Main Evaluation
Peer Review Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its academic quality, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, relevance, and contribution to the field.
04
AUTHOR RESPONSE Revision Stage
Revision by Authors
When revisions are requested, authors are expected to respond to reviewer comments and revise the manuscript carefully before resubmission.
05
EDITORIAL ASSESSMENT Decision Stage
Final Editorial Evaluation
The editor considers the reviewer recommendations, manuscript revisions, and overall academic quality before making the editorial decision.
06
COMPLETION Final Stage
Editorial Decision
Authors receive the editorial decision through the journal's online submission system together with the relevant review information.
REVIEW CRITERIA
What Reviewers Evaluate
01
Originality
The manuscript should provide a meaningful academic contribution and demonstrate originality.
02
Relevance
The topic should be relevant to the journal's scope and scholarly audience.
03
Methodology
The methods should be appropriate, clear, and sufficiently explained.
04
Academic Quality
The manuscript should demonstrate clear argumentation and appropriate scholarly standards.
05
Results & Discussion
Findings should be presented clearly and discussed in relation to relevant scholarship.
06
Contribution
The study should provide value to research, practice, or educational development.
EDITORIAL OUTCOMES
Possible Review Decisions
A
Decision
Accept
The manuscript is considered suitable for publication.
MR
Decision
Minor Revision
Limited revisions are required before final evaluation.
JR
Decision
Major Revision
Substantial revisions are required before further consideration.
R
Decision
Reject
The manuscript is not accepted for publication.
PEER REVIEW PRINCIPLES
Academic Quality and Editorial Integrity
The peer-review process is designed to support fair scholarly evaluation, constructive academic feedback, and continuous improvement of manuscripts considered for publication in JSMEI.
01Confidential Review
02Academic Evaluation
03Constructive Feedback
04Editorial Decision
