TESAM Academy Refereed Journal carries out a rigorous peer review process to evaluate the scientific quality, originality and contribution of the submitted articles to their field. In this process, referees are expected to make objective and detailed evaluations according to the specified criteria. The critical role of the referees in the evaluation process has a significant impact on the quality and publishability of the manuscript.

The peer review process consists of the following stages:

Managing Editor Review:

The submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the managing editors. Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's scope of publication, do not comply with the spelling rules, or violate publication ethics are rejected at this stage. Therefore, the manuscript must be prepared in accordance with the standards set by the journal in order to proceed to the peer review process.

Associate Editor Review:

Manuscripts that pass the executive editor's review are examined in more detail by the associate editor. At this stage, it is reviewed whether the study has sufficient scientific quality. Studies that successfully pass the associate editor review are included in the peer review process.

Peer-Review:

TESAM Academy Refereed Journal uses a double blind peer review system. In this system, both referees and authors are unaware of each other's identities. The manuscripts are sent to at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The task of the reviewers is to evaluate the manuscript according to the following criteria;
Title: Does the title reflect the content? Are there unnecessary terms or phrases?
Abstract and Summary: Does the abstract clearly present the problem and main findings of the study? Are the keywords correct and sufficient? Does the abstract reflect the Turkish abstract?
Introduction: Is the problem and literature sufficiently clear? Is the purpose of the study clearly stated?
Literature Review: Is the literature review sufficient and does it serve the purpose?
Evaluation: Does the research make an original contribution to the field? Are originality, consistency and practical contributions sufficient?

Review of Referee Reports:

If one of the referees gives a positive opinion and the other one gives a negative opinion, the Journal Editorial Committee may decide to appoint a third referee by reviewing the referee reports. At least two referees must give a positive opinion for the article to be published.

Correction Process:

Manuscripts that are requested to be corrected by the referees are revised by the authors and resubmitted to the same referees. At this stage, a final decision is made in line with the reviewers' evaluation. The feedback of the referees during the evaluation process is extremely important in terms of improving the scientific quality of the article.

Editorial Board Decision:

The positive reports of the referees are taken into consideration by the Editorial Board in the final decision-making process. However, the Editorial Board has the authority to make the final decision and this decision is binding.

Referee Evaluation Criteria (Qualitative)

Title
Does the title reflect the content?
Are there any unnecessary terms or phrases in the title?
Summary and Abstract
Does the abstract clearly present the problem/thesis of the study?
Do the keywords accurately and adequately reflect the subject, content and scope of the study?
Are the main findings stated and the interpretations related to the main findings summarised?
Does the abstract reflect the Turkish abstract?
Introduction
Is the problem presented in a clear and understandable way?
Are the theoretical knowledge and researches related to the problem adequately stated?
Has the literature related to the problem been examined critically (contradictions, gaps, inconsistencies, methodological deficiencies)?
Are the reasons for the research emphasised by stating the gap in the literature?
Are the aims of the research clearly and understandably stated?
Is the theoretical framework on which the research is based expressed?
Literature Review
Is the literature review adequate?
Have interrelated sources been brought together?
Have the necessary comparisons been made regarding the sources?
Does the literature review follow a sequence from general to specific?
Is there a research requirement at the end of the literature review?
Does the literature review form the basis for the research purpose and questions?

Evaluation

Is the theoretical and practical contribution of the research to the field mentioned?
Are the necessary suggestions presented for the solution of the problem?
Basic Principles / (Original and new contributions to the field as well as the methodological competence of the studies are the main criteria for publication)
Does the study make an original contribution to the body of knowledge in the field?
Does the study have an original thesis? Is the argumentation for this thesis consistent within itself?
Is the message intended to be conveyed in the study clear and understandable?
Is it scientifically up-to-date?
Does the study make a practical contribution that will be useful to experts, policy makers and practitioners?