Peer Review Process

SCHOLE: Studies of Social and Holistic Education applies a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scholarly contribution of every manuscript. All submissions are evaluated through a fair, transparent, and timely review procedure.

1. Review Model

This journal implements a double-blind peer review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other to minimize bias and ensure an objective assessment.

2. Initial Screening

After submission, the Editorial Office conducts an initial screening to check: (1) suitability with the journal’s focus and scope, (2) completeness of manuscript components, (3) compliance with author guidelines and template, and (4) basic academic writing quality. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for correction or rejected at this stage.

3. Plagiarism Check

All manuscripts are screened for similarity using plagiarism-detection tools. Submissions with unacceptable similarity levels or suspected academic misconduct will be rejected or returned for clarification and revision.

4. Peer Review Stage

Manuscripts that pass the screening are assigned by the Editor to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers assess the manuscript based on originality, theoretical and methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, adequacy of references, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor will make one of the following decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. If reviewer opinions differ significantly, the Editor may invite an additional reviewer.

6. Revision Process

Authors must revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments and submit: (1) a revised manuscript and (2) a response letter detailing how each comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be re-reviewed depending on the extent of changes required.

7. Copyediting and Proofreading

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting to improve clarity, consistency, and formatting. Authors will receive proofs for final checking prior to publication.

8. Estimated Timeframe

Initial screening: 3–7 days
Peer review: 2–4 weeks
Revision by authors: 1–3 weeks (depending on the decision)
Final decision and production: 1–2 weeks

The journal strives to publish accepted manuscripts as promptly as possible while maintaining high academic standards.

9. Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based feedback, disclose any potential conflicts of interest, and avoid using manuscript content for personal advantage.