Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Journal of Comparative Education Nexus undergo a rigorous, transparent, and structured peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of published articles.

1. Initial Submission and Editorial Screening
   Upon submission, the manuscript is evaluated by the Editorial Team to assess its alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, adherence to author guidelines, and basic methodological soundness. Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.
2. Plagiarism Screening
   All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software to ensure originality. Manuscripts with significant similarity or evidence of academic misconduct will be rejected.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review
   Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are reviewed by a minimum of two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. The journal applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to ensure objectivity and eliminate bias.
4. Review Criteria
   Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:
   • Originality and novelty of the study
   • Relevance to the journal’s scope
   • Methodological rigor and validity
   • Clarity of analysis and argumentation
   • Contribution to theory and/or practice
5. Review Timeline
   The peer-review process is typically completed within 4 to 8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.
6. Editorial Decision
   Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor will make one of the following decisions:
   • Accept without revision
   • Accept with minor revisions
   • Revise and resubmit (major revisions required)
   • Reject
7. Revision Process
   Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers’ comments and resubmit within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be subject to further evaluation by the original reviewers.
8. Final Decision and Publication
   The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, and publication.
9. Open Peer Review Policy
   While the journal primarily adopts a double-blind peer-review model, it supports principles of transparency in scholarly communication. Upon publication, reviewer comments may be disclosed at the discretion of the editorial board and with the consent of reviewers. Reviewer identities remain anonymous unless explicitly agreed otherwise.
10. Publication Ethics
    The journal adheres to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and malpractice prevention. All participants in the publication process (authors, reviewers, and editors) are expected to uphold high standards of ethical conduct.