Peer-review process and responsibilities of reviewers

  • All reviewing judgments shall be objective.
  • Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
  • Reviewed articles shall be treated confidentially.
  • Reviewers shall have no conflict of interest with respect to reviewed articles.
  • Reviewers shall point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.

Editors publishing in their own journal must not abuse their authority.
The process of peer review must be conducted regardless of the author.

Reviewers shall assess the manuscript in a timely manner.

For further information concerning the responsibilities of reviewers see the Reviewing Procedure Flowchart presented in fig 1.

Submitted manuscripts are first validated by the Editorial board, which checks for technical and basic scientific compliance with journal requirements. The Editor may choose to reject manuscripts that do not fit within the scope of the Journal, or are clearly lacking in scientific quality.

Validated manuscripts are assigned to an Editorial Board Member on the basis of the thematic field of the manuscript.

The Editor in chief then performs a progression assessment using an online form.

Manuscripts selected for progression are assigned by the Editor in chief to independent reviewers for peer review.


The reviews are received by the Editor in chief who makes a recommendation to the Editor. This may involve one or more rounds of revision by the authors. The final decision whether to publish or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor in chief or a member of the Editorial board.

The above process operates entirely online. The Editorial office is responsible for administering the process, and all communication between authors, editor in chief and reviewers is via the office. The editor in chief may choose to remain anonymous, and peer reviewers are always anonymous.

A well prepared manuscript of high scientific quality will normally be sent to the Editor in chief within one week. Within another week it will be returned and sent for peer review and the decision will follow within a two-week period. If no revisions are needed, the manuscript could be accepted within six weeks.

The Yearbook of the Faculty of Education is published once a year. Manuscripts containing novelty and research of hypotheses of high scientific quality are given a priority.