MANUSCRIPT REVIEW PROCESS

Preparation to Submission

Before submitting a manuscript, authors are required to prepare and upload the following documents in addition to the main manuscript file. Submissions that do not include these documents in the required format will be returned to the authors for completion before the initial editorial review.

1.Title Page Form
Authors must prepare a separate Title Page document to ensure compliance with the journal’s double-blind peer review policy.
2. Journal Template
Authors must prepare their manuscript strictly in accordance with the official journal template.
3. Copyright Agreement Form
All authors must complete and sign the Copyright Agreement Form prior to publication.

Authors are strongly advised to carefully review all submission requirements before uploading their files to the online submission system. Incomplete documentation may delay the editorial review process.

1. Initial review

Each submitted manuscript is subjected to an initial editorial review based on the following Manuscript Initial Review Criteria. In addition, all manuscripts are assessed for compliance with APA style, adherence to the journal’s article template, and plagiarism (similarity rate). This process takes about 5-7 weekdays (excluding revision time if required), and the authors are notified about the first decision.

---

Initial Review Criteria
Manuscripts are subjected to an initial evaluation by the Editors based on the following criteria before they proceed with peer review:

---

Research articles:
1. Original, not fully or partially published previously
2. Not submitted simultaneously to another journal
3. Relevance and contribution of the research topic to the field of curriculum and instruction, appeal to international audience
4. Presence of critical components of a research article including conceptual and research framework/review, methods and findings, and discussion.
5. Method details, ethical issues and limitations.
6. Evidence/data-based results, relevance for research questions and methodological approach
7. An acceptable proficiency and clarity in language use
8. Reference list in line with citations and quotations used

---

Research review articles:
1. Original, not fully or partially published previously
2. Not submitted simultaneously to another journal
3. Relevance and contribution of research review to the field of curriculum and instruction, appeal to international audience
4. Presence of critical components of a research review article including theoretical/conceptual framework, methods and findings, and discussion.
5. Details of systematic review methods and limitations.
6. Review-based results, relevance for research questions and methodological approach
7. An acceptable proficiency and clarity in language use
8. Reference list in line with citations and quotations used

---

Theoretical/Conceptual articles:
1. Original, not fully or partially published previously
2. Not submitted simultaneously to another journal
3. Relevance and significance of the topic for the field of curriculum and instruction, appeal to international audience
4. A justified purpose, and methodology for conceptual/theoretical analysis
5. Grounded in existing literature
6. Potential for offering new concepts, theoretical arguments, and models
7. An acceptable proficiency and clarity in language use
8. Reference list in line with citations and quotations used

---

2. Double-Blind Peer Review
The journal employs a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain concealed to ensure an anonymous evaluation. Each manuscript is initially reviewed by two independent reviewers who evaluate its scholarly merit, methodological soundness, and contribution to the field. In cases where the reviewers’ recommendations differ substantially, the editorial board may assign the manuscript to a third reviewer to secure an additional assessment for a substantiated editorial decision. When the reviewers recommend revisions, the authors are invited to revise and resubmit their manuscript. The revised version is then re-evaluated by the reviewers to verify whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised during the initial review round. The editors also assess the manuscript in this process and can take decisions to reassign the article to new reviewers when the initial peer review does not fulfill the requirements of a substantial review. The authors must prepare a point-by-point response letter, carefully addressing each comment from the reviewers and the editor. Each reviewer and editor comment should be quoted in full and followed by a clear, specific response explaining how the manuscript was revised. If a comment is not fully addressed, authors must provide a clear and reasoned justification. This multi-stage evaluation process ensures fairness, academic rigor, and the publication of high-quality research.
Peer review takes approximately 2-3 months depending on the cycle of revisions needed. Authors are expected to complete the revisions specified in the revision letter by the due date. In force majeure situations, authors may ask for additional time to complete revisions. If the revisions are not submitted by the due date, they will be considered as a new submission.

---

3. Publication
After the peer review process and revisions, if accepted, the manuscript goes through language, similarity check and typesetting for the IJOCIS article template before publication. This process takes about 8-10 days. Then the article is assigned a unique DOI number and published as an early view until it is included in the upcoming issue.