JINEA: Journal of Innovation in Education and Learning implements a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure fairness, objectivity, transparency, and the highest standards of scholarly publishing. Throughout the review process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential to minimize bias and maintain an independent evaluation.

Each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening followed by evaluation by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. The journal is committed to maintaining research integrity, academic quality, editorial independence, and compliance with internationally recognized publication ethics.

Peer Review Principles

• Double-Blind Review: The identities of authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.
• Independent Review: Every manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers possessing expertise relevant to the subject area.
• Confidentiality: Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and related documents are treated as confidential.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must decline the review if any financial, institutional, collaborative, or personal conflict of interest exists.
• Objective Evaluation: Manuscripts are evaluated solely based on originality, scientific significance, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, clarity, validity of results, and contribution to education and learning.
• Publication Ethics: The journal follows internationally accepted publication ethics and adheres to the principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
• Editorial Transparency: Authors receive anonymous reviewer comments together with editorial decisions and recommendations for manuscript improvement.

Peer Review Workflow

• 1. Technical Screening
  The Editorial Office verifies manuscript completeness, compliance with the journal's aims and scope, author guidelines, ethical policies, and formatting requirements. All submissions undergo similarity screening using plagiarism detection software before entering peer review.
• 2. Initial Editorial Assessment
  The Editor evaluates the manuscript's originality, novelty, academic merit, scientific contribution, and suitability for the journal.
• 3. Handling Editor Assignment
  A Handling Editor is assigned to supervise the entire editorial and peer review process.
• 4. Reviewer Assignment
  The Handling Editor appoints at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. Reviewer selection is based on academic competence, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest.
• 5. Double-Blind Peer Review
  Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:
  • Originality and novelty
  • Relevance to the journal scope
  • Scientific significance
  • Methodological rigor
  • Literature review quality
  • Data analysis and interpretation
  • Discussion and conclusions
  • Language quality and organization
  • Reference quality and completeness
  • Research ethics compliance
  Reviewer recommendations include:
  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject
• 6. Author Revision
  Authors revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments and submit a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed.
• 7. Re-review (if necessary)
  Revised manuscripts requiring substantial modification may be returned to the original reviewers for additional evaluation before the final editorial decision.
• 8. Final Editorial Decision
  The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer recommendations, editorial evaluation, ethical considerations, and the revised manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.
• 9. Copyediting & Production
  Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, proofreading, layout editing, DOI registration, metadata verification, and final author approval before publication.
• 10. Publication
  The final version of the article is published as an Open Access publication and becomes immediately accessible through the journal website.

Estimated Manuscript Processing Time

• Initial Editorial Screening: 5 days
• Peer Review Process: 14 days
• Author Revision: 7 days
• Final Editorial Decision: 3 days
• Copyediting, Proofreading, Typesetting, DOI Registration & Publication: 6 days
• Total Average Processing Time: 35 days