Peer review Process

Peer review is an essential part of the publication process, and it ensures that “Social Education” maintains the highest quality standards for its published papers. All manuscripts submitted to our journal are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed by experts.
“Social Education” uses Open Journal Systems (OJS) for electronic article submission and Double-Blind Peer Review. The manuscript's reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Immediately after submission, the journal's Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor will perform a pre-check of the manuscript. The editor looks at whether the article meets the formal requirements, whether the problem analyzed in the paper corresponds to the theme of the journal, and whether the quality of the article is characterized by at least the minimum potential to be published in the journal. If the article fails to meet the formal requirements, it is returned to the author(s) for correction. The paper is rejected without review if its topic contradicts the journal's theme or if quality of the article is too low.
If the initial check of the manuscript is positive, it is submitted to two reviewers (editorial board members or other specialists assisting the editorial board). The reviewers are appointed confidentially. If the problem of the submitted scientific publication is interdisciplinary, one assessment shall be carried out by the scientist of the contiguous area of science. The third reviewer is appointed if one reviewer's conclusion is positive, and the other is negative.

After considering the reviewers’ recommendations, the final decision of the journal editor can be:

  1. accept without revisions
  2. publish with minor revisions
  3. publish with major revisions
  4. rejects

We justify our decision to the author in recommendations. If we recommend publishing without revisions, we briefly point out the advantages of the article. If we recommend publishing with revisions, we specify what and how must be improved. If we propose to reject the article, we justify this decision. If we decide to publish with major revisions, the article shall be returned to you for additional review. Final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.


Requirements for reviewers

The reviewer's role is vital in ensuring the quality of the research paper. Every reviewer is expected to evaluate the manuscript promptly, transparently, and ethically, following the COPE guidelines.

Reviewers should meet the following criteria:

  • Hold no conflicts of interest with the authors of the paper under review
  • Should not come from the same institution as the authors
  • Should not have published together with the authors in the last three years
  • Have a PhD and publications in the field or practical experience in the field


Information for reviewers

We ask the reviewers to consider the time limits. Upon receiving the offer to review the manuscript, please reply whether you accept. You should do the review within one month. If there are any obstacles, please inform us in advance that you will not be able to prepare your review.

Reviewers should consider the following questions during the review:

  1. Does the title of the manuscript accurately reflect its content? Will the person reading the abstract clearly understand what this article is about? Will the keywords help you find this work using the library search systems?
  2. What is this scientific paper new or original for? Does it bring a new concept, research results, or another approach towards the long-analyzed aspect?
  3. Do the structure and content of the article meet the requirements for scientific papers, according to the nature of the research? Does it meet the criteria for the article, presenting the results of qualitative research? Does it meet the requirements for the article, showing the results of the quantitative research? Does the manuscript contain all the required parts?
  4. Are the research's problem, aim, and objectives properly formulated? Does the aim match the problem? Does the implementation of the objectives make it possible to achieve the goal?
  5. Is the literature review accurate, balanced, systematic, and based on the most recent sources? Is the leading research, published in authoritative scientific publications, reviewed? Are there any additional sources that you would recommend introducing?
  6. Is the research methodology described and justified? Is the research type justified (qualitative/quantitative/mixed research)? Are the data collection, data analysis methods and procedures named and explained?
  7. Are the results of the research properly structured? Are they reasoned enough? Do they meet the requirements for quantitative/qualitative data visualization?
  8. Is the illustrative material (tables, charts, graphs, etc.) of good quality?
  9. What is the scientific discussion's depth, level of argumentation and value? Are generalizations and conclusions related to the scientific problem, the article's aim, and the research results?
  10. Do the reference style in the text and the list of literature comply with the requirements of APA 6th edition?
  11. Is the style of the manuscript language scientific, at the same time being clear to the reader? Are there language style or any other errors?


Confidentiality of reviews

Until the article is published, reviewers should keep the manuscript's content, including the abstract, confidential. Reviewers should also be careful not to reveal their identity to the authors in their comments or in metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.


How to Submit an article

Submit the article as two documents.

The first document – the article itself without the name/s and surname/s of the author/s; without the name of the institution and other data. This document will be used for double-blind peer review.

The second document - article title, name/s, and surname/s of the author/s; the name of the institution; address and e-mail of the author/s; data about the author/s: scientific field, degree, pedagogical name, scientific interests.

Other documents – more complex high-quality pictures, tables, and other graphical material can be submitted separately.

We pay attention to the readers of “Social Education”. We publish articles for educational and interdisciplinary audiences: researchers, educators, lecturers, heads of institutions, education assistants, teachers, children well-being professionals.