1. Article Evaluation Period
The average article evaluation period is 3 months. However, this period can vary depending on various factors, including referee feedback, whether referees request corrections to the submitted manuscript, and whether authors fulfill the requested corrections.
2. Blind Refereeing and Evaluation
Blind refereeing is a method used to ensure the highest quality publications. This method forms the basis for the objective evaluation of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals. Referee opinions play a decisive role in the journal's publication quality. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated in a double-blind manner according to the following stages. In the double-blind method, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed. Therefore, authors are requested to remove their names when uploading their articles to the system.
3. Initial Evaluation Process
• Manuscripts submitted to the journal are first evaluated by the editor. At this stage, manuscripts that do not meet the journal's objectives and scope, contain critical scientific errors, lack originality, or do not meet the journal's publication policies are rejected.
• Before submission to the editorial board, the editor(s) check the manuscript's format, literature review, methodology, findings, and conclusions to ensure compliance. If any deficiencies and/or errors are identified, the manuscript is returned to the author for correction. For any corrections that need to be made, the author is contacted through the Dergipark system and asked to make the requested corrections. Manuscripts not submitted within the allotted timeframe are rejected. Manuscripts deemed suitable are then transferred to the referee appointment process.
• During the preliminary review process, the editor thoroughly examines the introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, conclusion, evaluation, and discussion sections of the manuscript in terms of the journal's publication policies and scope, as well as originality. The author is responsible for making any corrections specified by the editor(s) during the preliminary review process. Manuscripts that meet no problems and comply with the journal's policies are accepted into the peer-review process.
4. Refereeing Process
• Reviewers are assigned to manuscripts based on their content and the journal's areas of expertise. The editor and editorial board reviewing the manuscript recommend at least two referees from the Editorial Board or the Referee Pool based on their areas of expertise, or they may recommend new referees appropriate to the manuscript's field.
• Referee proposals suitable for their field are evaluated by the editor, and the manuscripts are forwarded to the reviewers.
• The referee evaluation period is 10 days. Referees who fail to notify within 10 days will receive a reminder message. Referees who fail to notify within 5 days of the reminder message will be removed from the publication's referee list and the journal's referee pool. The Editorial Board will then forward the manuscript to a different reviewer for review.
• Authors are required to complete correction suggestions submitted by referees or editors within 10 days. This period may be extended by the editor upon author request.
• Referees may review a manuscript's corrections to determine its appropriateness and, if necessary, may request multiple corrections.
• The Editorial Board may, if deemed necessary, have the manuscript reviewed by more than two referees. The final decision on the manuscript to be published is made by the Editorial Board, taking into account the majority opinion of the reviewers.
• Referees make their evaluations according to the following options:
a) Acceptance
b) Rejection
c) Minor revision
d) Major revision
Manuscripts that receive two rejections, or one rejection and one major revision, are rejected by the editor without a second review.
• For a manuscript to be accepted into the journal, it must receive positive reviews from both reviewers. Articles that receive one acceptance, one rejection, and one minor revision and one rejection are sent to a third reviewer for review. If the third reviewer accepts the manuscript and the editor approves, the manuscript is accepted for publication. If the third reviewer rejects the manuscript, the editor rejects the manuscript without further action.
• Articles that receive one or two major revisions are sent to the author for necessary corrections. After the author uploads the revision file, the manuscript is sent to the reviewer(s) who requested the major revision for re-evaluation.
• If the reviewer(s) who selected the acceptance or minor revision option indicate that they would like to review the manuscript again, the manuscript is sent to them.
5. Referee Reports
Referee reviews are generally based on the originality of studies, the method used, compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings and results, and a review of the literature.
This review is conducted based on the following elements:
a. Introduction and Literature: The review report includes comments on the presentation and objectives of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the topic, the scope of relevant literature, its currency and originality, and the consistency of the title, abstract, and article content.
b. Method: The review report includes information on the appropriateness of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, validity and reliability, as well as comments on the data collection and analysis process.
c. Findings: The review report includes comments on the presentation of the findings obtained within the methodological framework, the accuracy of the analysis methods, the consistency of the findings with the research objectives, the provision of necessary tables, figures, and visuals, and the conceptual evaluation of the tests used.
ç. Evaluation and discussion: The evaluation report includes a discussion of the topic based on the findings, a discussion of its relevance to the research question(s) and hypothesis(es), generalizability, and applicability.
d. Conclusion and recommendations: The evaluation report includes comments on its contribution to the literature, recommendations for future studies, and field practice.
e. Style and expression: The evaluation report also includes comments on the comprehensiveness of the study title, the appropriate use of Turkish, and the appropriate use of citations and references in the language of the full text in accordance with APA 7 rules.
f. Overall evaluation: The evaluation report includes comments on the originality of the study as a whole and its contribution to educational literature and field practice.
6. Objection to Referee Reports
Author(s) may object to negative views of the referees, provided they provide evidence. This objection is reviewed by the Editorial Board, and if deemed necessary, a different referee opinion is sought.
7. Editor Evaluation Process
Based on the feedback received from the referees, the editor, in collaboration with the Editorial Board, makes the final decision. The editor reserves the right to make necessary spelling corrections, corrections related to abstracts written in foreign languages, and other corrections as deemed necessary in submitted manuscripts.
8. Editorial Board Evaluation Process
The editor accepts articles accepted based on the reviewers' feedback and submits them to the publication process. Articles deemed unsuitable for publication by the Editorial Board are rejected. If a positive decision is made for publication, the article is re-arranged. A DOI number is then provided for the article. Articles are published in the order determined by the Editorial Board. Minor corrections must be made to the journal editorial office via Dergipark within three days of publication.
9. Withdrawal Process for Authors
• Authors are obligated to cooperate with the journal editor in the retraction process if they discover an error or mistake in their published, early-view, or under-review manuscript.
• Only articles submitted to the journal that are in the pre-review phase can be withdrawn through the system.