All manuscripts submitted to the Research in Educational Policy and Management (REPAM) are rigorously evaluated via a double-blind peer review process.
All submitted manuscripts are read and evaluated firstly by the editorial staff. The papers which are not fit to journal’s scope or are judged to be of insufficient general interest are rejected without external review.
Peer review process
Manuscripts that passed the preliminary evaluation are sent to at least two external reviewers selected according to their specialties and academic skills. The peer review process is carried out entirely through the online submission system. Reviewers are expected:
– to evaluate scientific quality of the manuscript, especially its originality, validity, significance, ethical aspects, presentation quality and interest to the readers;
– to provide an overall recommendation for publication;
– to provide a review report.
All submitted manuscripts are evaluated through a double-blind review process. Double-blind review means that the reviewers don’t get to know the identity of the authors, and the authors don’t get to know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers play a central role in ensuring the integrity and quality of the scholarly publication. They must conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. Ethical guidelines for reviewers who contribute to REPAM are detailed in our Publication Ethics Policy.
The Editor-in-Chief or the Guest Editor of a Special Issue make the final decision based on the reviewers’ recommendations, from among several possibilities:
– Accept in present form;
– Accept after minor revisions;
– Reconsider after major revisions;
If the revisions are required, authors will be asked to resubmit the revised manuscript within a certain period of time. In major revisions, the revised version of the manuscript will be returned to the reviewers and it will be re-evaluated.
Appeals and Complaints Policy
Authors have the right to appeal a decision on their submissions to the journals published by REPAM if they believe the decision was unfair. To appeal a decision, please submit a letter detailing the nature of the appeal and indicating why the decision is viewed as unfair.
The Editor-in-Chief will review all relevant documentation relating to the submission, may consult the relevant Associate Editor or Reviewers and may appoint a new Reviewer to evaluate the submission before making a decision. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief will be final.
For complaints relating to the policies and procedures of REPAM or the conduct of editorial staff, please email the details of the complaint to the Editor-in-Chief or to the publisher, OpenED Network. All complaints directed through the correct channels will be acknowledged and the resolution will be conveyed to the complainant. Complaints will be resolved as quickly as possible.