The Eurasian Journal of Teacher Education (EJTE) follows a structured and transparent evaluation process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and ethical integrity of all published manuscripts. The review process consists of the following stages:

Preliminary Evaluation Stage

Upon submission, each manuscript is first assigned to a Journal Editor. The Journal Editor conducts an initial screening to examine whether the manuscript:

• aligns with the aims and scope of the journal,
• meets ethical requirements (e.g., ethics committee approval where applicable),
• complies with plagiarism and similarity standards, and
• demonstrates sufficient originality and scholarly contribution.
• Manuscripts that lack originality or do not fall within the aims and scope of the journal are rejected at this stage. In such cases, the corresponding author is informed of the rejection along with the reasons.
• Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the Language and Style Editor, who reviews the writing quality, language use, and formal structure of the manuscript. If deficiencies are identified, the corresponding author is notified and requested to complete the necessary revisions within five (5) days.

Following the completion of language and formatting revisions, the manuscript is assigned to a Section Editor (Field Editor) for subject-matter evaluation and reviewer selection.

Section Editor and Reviewer Assignment Stage 

The Section Editor conducts a detailed evaluation of the manuscript in terms of:

• relevance to the literature,
• methodological rigor,
• presentation of findings, and
• coherence of discussion and conclusions.

If the manuscript is found unsuitable for peer review, it may be rejected by the Section Editor, and the corresponding author is informed with a justification. If the manuscript is considered appropriate, the Section Editor assigns at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected with particular care to ensure that they are not affiliated with the same institution as the authors. If invited reviewers decline or fail to respond within the specified time, alternative reviewers are appointed.

Peer Review Stage

Manuscripts accepted for review are evaluated by the assigned reviewers within the timeframe specified by the Section Editor. Reviewers assess the manuscript according to EJTE’s evaluation criteria, including:

• ethical compliance,
• originality,
• academic contribution,
• methodological soundness, and
• clarity of presentation.

Each reviewer submits a detailed evaluation report through the journal system and completes the EJTE Reviewer Evaluation Form, thereby concluding the review process. Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Section Editor may request revisions from the author(s). Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts carefully in line with the reviewers’ comments within the timeframe specified by the Section Editor. Authors may submit a reasoned objection to reviewer comments if necessary. All objections are evaluated by the Editorial Board, and if deemed appropriate, an additional reviewer opinion may be sought.

Completion of the Evaluation Process

The Section Editor reviews the reviewers’ reports and recommendations and makes a decision based on the following criteria:

• If both reviewers recommend acceptance, the manuscript is accepted.
• If both reviewers recommend rejection, the manuscript is rejected.
• If one reviewer recommends acceptance and the other rejection, a third reviewer is assigned.
• The final decision in such cases is made by the Section Editor based on the majority recommendation.

Editorial Board Decision

Taking the Section Editor’s decision into consideration, the Editorial Board reaches the final publication decision. The corresponding author is formally notified of the outcome of the evaluation process.