Educational Management and Advancement Journal (EduMAJ) implements a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure each manuscript's academic quality, originality, and scholarly contribution. In this system, the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to maintain impartiality.

Review Procedure

• All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to ensure alignment with the journal's focus, scope, and formatting guidelines.
• Manuscripts that pass the screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant educational management and administration expertise.
• Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, methodological rigor, presentation clarity, findings validity, and contribution to theory, policy, or practice.
• Reviewers must complete their assessments within 4 to 6 weeks after accepting the invitation.
• Review recommendations include: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
• If significant discrepancies arise between reviewers' comments, the editorial team may assign a third reviewer to ensure a balanced evaluation.

Editorial Decision

• The Editor-in-Chief decides on acceptance, revision, or rejection based on the reviewers' input and the manuscript's relevance and scholarly value.
• Authors are notified of the decision along with constructive reviewer comments to assist in improving the manuscript.
• Revised submissions must be resubmitted within the timeframe stated in the decision letter and include a point-by-point response to reviewers' feedback.

Ethical Considerations

• Reviewers must handle all manuscripts confidentially and may not use any part of the content for personal advantage.
• Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest and recuse themselves when appropriate.
• EduMAJ follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers to ensure a fair and transparent review process.

Appeals

Authors who believe a decision was made in error may submit a formal appeal to the editorial office, including a detailed justification. Appeals will be reviewed independently by the editorial board. The editorial decision following the appeal is considered final.