Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Mathematics and Sciences Education (IJMSEd) is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, independent, and confidential peer-review process. Peer review is an essential component of the journal's quality assurance and is intended to evaluate the originality, methodological rigor, scholarly contribution, clarity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

Peer Review Model

IJMSEd applies a double-blind peer-review system, in which the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors. Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area. Reviewers should not have relationships or conflicts of interest that could reasonably compromise the independence or objectivity of their evaluations.

Peer Review Process

The peer-review process generally consists of the following stages:

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the IJMSEd online submission system. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript complies with the journal's aims and scope, author guidelines, ethical requirements, and submission requirements.

2. Administrative and Technical Check

The editorial office conducts an initial check to determine whether the submission meets the journal's basic technical and administrative requirements. This may include checking manuscript completeness, required declarations, formatting, author information, anonymization requirements, and supporting files. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before further editorial consideration.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor evaluates the manuscript to determine whether it:

• falls within the aims and scope of IJMSEd;

• demonstrates sufficient scholarly relevance and potential contribution;

• meets basic standards of academic writing and presentation;

• follows the journal's ethical and publication requirements; and

• is sufficiently developed to proceed to external peer review.

A manuscript may be rejected at this stage without external peer review if it is outside the journal's scope, does not meet minimum scholarly standards, contains serious ethical concerns, or is otherwise unsuitable for publication in IJMSEd.

4. Similarity and Research Integrity Screening

Submitted manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection software and other appropriate editorial checks. A similarity report is interpreted by the editorial team in context. IJMSEd does not determine plagiarism solely on the basis of a numerical similarity percentage. Where potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, data fabrication, or other research-integrity concerns are identified, the manuscript will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

5. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that successfully pass editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. Reviewer selection may take into consideration:

• subject expertise;

• research and publication experience;

• methodological expertise;

• absence of relevant conflicts of interest; and

• ability to provide an objective and constructive assessment.

The final selection of reviewers is the responsibility of the editorial team.

6. Double-Blind Review

IJMSEd uses double-blind peer review. The journal takes reasonable steps to conceal the identities of authors and reviewers during the review process. Authors should therefore prepare manuscripts in accordance with the journal's anonymization requirements and avoid including unnecessary identifying information in the blinded manuscript. Reviewers must not attempt to identify the authors.

7. Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts based on scholarly criteria that may include:

• relevance to the aims and scope of IJMSEd;

• originality and significance of the study;

• clarity of the research problem and objectives;

• appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework;

• methodological rigor;

• adequacy and transparency of data analysis;

• validity of interpretations and conclusions;

• quality of the discussion;

• engagement with relevant literature;

• clarity and organization of the manuscript;

• ethical considerations; and

• overall contribution to mathematics and sciences education.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, evidence-based, and respectful comments.

8. Reviewer Recommendations

After completing their assessment, reviewers may recommend an editorial outcome such as:

• Accept;

• Minor Revision;

• Major Revision; or

• Reject.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision regarding a manuscript rests with the responsible editor.

9. Editorial Decision

The editor considers the reviewers' reports, the quality and relevance of the manuscript, ethical considerations, and the journal's editorial standards before making a decision. When reviewers provide substantially conflicting assessments, the editor may:

• evaluate the competing recommendations;

• request clarification from a reviewer;

• invite an additional independent reviewer; or

• make an editorial decision based on the available evidence.

Editorial decisions are not determined by a simple numerical vote among reviewers.

10. Revision by Authors

When revision is requested, authors should carefully address the reviewers' and editor's comments. Authors should normally submit:

• a revised manuscript; and

• a point-by-point response explaining how each comment has been addressed or providing a scholarly justification where a suggested change has not been adopted.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the responsible editor, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions. A request for revision does not guarantee eventual acceptance.

11. Final Decision

After the review and revision process has been satisfactorily completed, the responsible editor makes the final editorial decision. Possible final decisions include acceptance or rejection. Acceptance indicates that the manuscript has met the journal's scholarly and editorial requirements and may proceed to the production process, subject to any final technical requirements.

Review Timeline

IJMSEd seeks to conduct peer review efficiently while maintaining the quality and integrity of the evaluation process. The duration of peer review may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the number and extent of revisions required, and the responsiveness of authors and reviewers. The journal therefore does not guarantee acceptance or publication within a fixed period. Authors may monitor the status of their submissions through the IJMSEd online submission system and may contact the editorial office when reasonable clarification regarding the status of a manuscript is required.

Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts and associated review materials are treated as confidential. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, share, distribute, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal, professional, or competitive advantage. Reviewer reports and editorial correspondence are also treated as confidential except where disclosure is required for legitimate ethical investigation or by applicable law.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect—or reasonably be perceived as affecting—their impartiality.  A reviewer should decline a review when a significant personal, professional, financial, institutional, academic, or collaborative relationship could compromise the independence of the assessment. Editors must similarly recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a relevant conflict of interest.

Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers are expected to:

• conduct reviews objectively and fairly;

• provide constructive and academically justified comments;

• maintain manuscript confidentiality;

• disclose conflicts of interest;

• avoid personal or discriminatory criticism;

• not use unpublished information for personal advantage;

• not require unnecessary citations to their own work or particular journals; and

• inform the editor of suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or other ethical concerns.

Use of Artificial Intelligence by Reviewers

Because submitted manuscripts are confidential documents, reviewers must not upload manuscripts, substantial manuscript content, unpublished data, or confidential review materials to publicly accessible generative AI systems or other external services where confidentiality and data protection cannot be assured. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the content, accuracy, integrity, and scholarly judgment of their review reports.

Manuscripts Submitted by Editors or Editorial Board Members

Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or individuals closely associated with IJMSEd are not exempt from the journal's peer-review requirements. Such submissions will be assigned to an independent editor who has no relevant conflict of interest. The submitting editor or editorial board member will not participate in reviewer selection, access confidential reviewer identities, or make the editorial decision on their own manuscript.

Reviewer Independence

IJMSEd seeks to ensure that peer review is independent from inappropriate influence by authors, editors, publishers, institutions, sponsors, or other parties. Reviewer recommendations and editorial decisions must be based on scholarly considerations rather than commercial, personal, institutional, or other non-academic interests.

Appeals Related to Peer Review

Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant misunderstanding, factual error, procedural irregularity, or inappropriate review may submit a reasoned appeal in accordance with the journal's Complaints and Appeals Policy. An appeal must provide substantive scholarly grounds and does not guarantee that the editorial decision will be changed.

Editorial Authority

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for maintaining the quality and integrity of the peer-review process. The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is an editorial decision informed by peer review, scholarly merit, ethical considerations, and the journal's policies.

International Journal of Mathematics and Sciences Education (IJMSEd)
Publisher: Nashir Al-Kutub Indonesia