All articles submitted to the Journal of New Approaches in Education are first subjected to a preliminary evaluation process and then to "double-blind review".

PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PROCESS

All articles submitted to the Journal of New Approaches in Education undergo a preliminary evaluation before being sent for a double-blind peer review. During this phase, the editorial team reviews each manuscript for compliance with the following criteria:

1. Adherence to Journal Formatting and Writing Rules

Manuscripts must be prepared in accordance with the journal’s specific formatting and writing guidelines, ensuring consistency in presentation.

2. Use of Academic Language

Submissions should demonstrate clear and scholarly language suitable for an academic audience.

3. Originality

Only original works that have not been previously published or submitted elsewhere are considered for publication. Manuscripts found to be duplicate submissions are rejected at this stage.

4. Plagiarism Check

Each manuscript must be accompanied by a plagiarism report from either Turnitin or iThenticate, showing a similarity rate of 20% or less. Submissions with a similarity rate exceeding 20% or lacking a plagiarism report are automatically rejected.

5. Relevance to Journal Scope

The manuscript’s purpose, subject, and content must align with the journal’s scope. Only studies pertinent to the journal’s focus areas are considered.

6. Required Structure and Sections

Manuscripts must include the following sections: title, abstract, keywords, introduction, literature review, method, results, discussion, conclusion, references, and, for studies in Turkish, an extended summary in English.

7. Word Count Limit

Submissions should not exceed 9,000 words, including references. Manuscripts exceeding this word count are subject to rejection.

8. Ethics Compliance

Articles must adhere to ethical research standards, and an ethics approval report should be uploaded with the manuscript.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria are rejected by the editorial board without proceeding to the peer review phase. This preliminary evaluation process is completed within a maximum of 10 days.

DOUBLE BLIND REVIEW

The blind review process begins for studies that have passed the preliminary evaluation process. In this journal, we adhere to a double-blind peer review process to ensure the integrity and impartiality of our review system. In a double-blind review, both the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the entire process. This anonymity helps to eliminate biases related to author characteristics (e.g., nationality, institution, seniority) and allows the manuscript to be evaluated based solely on its academic quality and contributions to the field. The following processes are followed in assigning reviewers:

1. Upon submission, authors are required to remove any identifiable information from the manuscript and supplementary files, including acknowledgments, funding sources, and affiliations. Our editorial team checks for compliance to ensure that no identifying information is present.

2. The editorial team assigns each manuscript to two reviewers based on their expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are provided with the anonymized version of the manuscript, so they evaluate the content without knowledge of the authors’ identities.

3. If both reviewers submit positive evaluations, the manuscript is accepted for publication. If both reviewers submit negative evaluations, the manuscript is rejected. However, if one review is positive and the other is negative, a third independent reviewer is assigned. The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript is then based on the report of the third reviewer.

4. Based on the feedback from the reviewers, authors may be asked to make revisions or corrections to improve the manuscript. In cases where additional expertise is deemed necessary, or upon recommendation from existing reviewers, the manuscript may be evaluated by more than three reviewers to ensure a thorough review process.

5. The editorial team considers the reviewers’ recommendations and reaches a decision regarding the manuscript. If revisions are requested, authors receive the anonymized feedback and are expected to respond without identifying themselves. Revisions are reviewed in a similar manner, with reviewers seeing only the revised anonymized manuscript.

6. Once the manuscript meets the reviewers' and editors' standards, it is accepted for publication. Author information is added only at the final stage, following acceptance.

By following these rigorous steps, our double-blind peer review process ensures a fair and unbiased evaluation of scholarly contributions, upholding the quality and reputation of our journal.