Peer Review Process & Policy
Ensuring Academic Excellence Through Rigorous Scholarly Evaluation
What Is Peer Review?
Peer review is the cornerstone of credible academic publishing. It is a structured evaluation mechanism through which qualified subject-matter experts independently assess submitted manuscripts before any publication decision is made. At IJTLE — the International Journal of Teaching, Learning and Education — peer review serves as the primary quality assurance framework that safeguards the scholarly rigour and originality of every article published.
The objective of this process is not merely to filter research, but to elevate it. Constructive reviewer feedback helps authors sharpen their arguments, strengthen their methodology, and present findings with greater clarity and academic precision. Peer review is, in this sense, a collaborative scholarly conversation between experts in the field.
Editorial Authority: Reviewers at IJTLE do not hold final decision-making authority. Their role is advisory — they provide expert recommendations and structured assessments. The ultimate publication decision rests exclusively with the IJTLE Editorial Board.
Types of Peer Review
Academic journals employ several peer review models, differing primarily in how the identities of authors and reviewers are handled during evaluation.
Single-Blind Review
Reviewer identities are kept confidential from authors. However, reviewers can see author names and institutional affiliations.
Neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities, ensuring impartial evaluation based solely on research merit.
Open Peer Review
Both author and reviewer identities are mutually disclosed, fostering accountability and transparent scholarly dialogue.
IJTLE follows the Double-Blind Peer Review model. This approach eliminates potential bias arising from author reputation, institutional affiliation, or geographical origin, ensuring every manuscript is assessed on the strength of its content alone.
Reviewer Selection & Qualification
IJTLE maintains a curated pool of peer reviewers comprising scholars, educators, researchers, and practitioners with demonstrated expertise across the disciplines of teaching, learning, and education. Each manuscript is assigned a minimum of two independent reviewers to ensure balanced and comprehensive evaluation.
Reviewers are identified and selected through the following channels:
1. Internal Reviewer Database
IJTLE maintains an established pool of scholars with a track record of producing thorough, high-quality, and timely reviews in relevant subject areas.
2. Bibliography Scanning
The editorial team identifies potential reviewers by examining reference lists of submitted manuscripts to locate experts actively working in the relevant field.
3. Academic Network & Conference Outreach
Researchers encountered at academic conferences, seminars, and symposia are invited to join the reviewer network based on their specialisation and scholarly standing.
4. Conflict of Interest Screening
All potential reviewers are screened to confirm they have no professional or personal conflict of interest with the manuscript's authors, subject matter, or institutional context.
Step-by-Step Review Process
From initial submission to the final editorial decision, every manuscript undergoes a structured and transparent evaluation journey at IJTLE. The stages are outlined below.
Stage 1 – Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the IJTLE online submission portal in MS Word format, following the prescribed Author Guidelines and journal template. The submission must include an abstract (150–250 words), relevant keywords (5–8 terms), and a reference list formatted in APA 7th Edition. All identifying author information must be removed from the manuscript file prior to submission to facilitate anonymous review.
Stage 2 – Editorial Desk Review
Upon receipt, the managing editor conducts a preliminary screening to assess whether the manuscript falls within IJTLE's scope, meets basic formatting requirements, and satisfies minimum quality thresholds. Manuscripts that are clearly out of scope, incomplete, or significantly below publishable standard may be desk-rejected at this stage without proceeding to external review. Authors are notified within 3–5 working days.
Stage 3 – Plagiarism & Originality Check
All manuscripts passing the desk review are subjected to a plagiarism screening using industry-standard detection tools. IJTLE maintains a zero-tolerance policy on academic dishonesty. The overall similarity index must not exceed 15% (excluding references, quotations, and properly attributed material). Manuscripts with an unacceptable similarity score are rejected and authors are notified with the screening report.
Stage 4 – Author Anonymisation
Before forwarding the manuscript to peer reviewers, the editorial team removes all identifying information — including author names, institutional affiliations, acknowledgements, funding disclosures, and self-referential citations — from the manuscript document.
Editorial Decisions Explained
Accept: Accepted without revisions.
Minor Revision: Small corrections required.
Major Revision: Significant improvements required.
Revise & Resubmit: A fresh evaluation is needed.
Reject: Not suitable for publication.
Ethical Standards in Peer Review
IJTLE follows strict ethical guidelines, including confidentiality, objectivity, conflict of interest disclosure, and timeliness in the peer review process.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long does the peer review process typically take at IJTLE?
The duration varies depending on reviewer availability and revision requirements. IJTLE aims to provide an initial decision within 4–8 weeks of manuscript submission. Authors can monitor their manuscript status through the Track Your Paper facility on the journal website.
Can I suggest or exclude specific reviewers?
Yes. Authors may suggest potential reviewers with relevant expertise or request the exclusion of specific individuals due to conflicts of interest at the time of submission. Such requests are given reasonable consideration, though the final reviewer assignment remains at the editorial team's discretion.
What should I do if I believe a reviewer's feedback is biased or unfair?
Authors who feel a review contains factual errors or demonstrates clear bias may contact the editorial office to raise their concerns formally. The editor-in-chief will investigate and may commission an additional independent review if warranted.
How do I become a peer reviewer for IJTLE?
Qualified academics and researchers are welcome to join the IJTLE reviewer communit (or contact us at: editor.ijtle@gmail.com). You may apply through the "Join as a Reviewer" section on the journal website, providing details of your academic qualifications and areas of specialisation.
Is there a word limit for the point-by-point response letter on resubmission?
There is no strict word limit for response letters. Authors are expected to address each reviewer comment clearly and methodically — either implementing the suggested change in the manuscript or providing a well-reasoned scholarly justification for any decision not to do so.
Ready to Submit Your Research?
Join a growing community of educators and researchers published in IJTLE — a trusted, open-access journal advancing knowledge in Teaching, Learning, and Education.
