Peer review process at the Journal of Educational Sciences at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University:
1- All research submitted to the journal is subject to preliminary examination and audit, and then peer review.
2- The researcher sends the manuscript and pledge to the journal’s email Jes@psau.edu.sa
3- After an article is submitted to a journal, the Journal’s secretary conducts an initial screening to sure that the manuscript is compatible with the conditions required by the Journal, including 1) the plagiarism check, 2) the type and size of the font, 3) the number of words, and then sends an email to the researcher with the manuscript ID number.
4- Send the manuscript to the journal’s editor (a member of the editorial board) to review the manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. Editor will consider the following aspects: 1) Is the manuscript good enough quality to be sent for peer review? 2) Does it conform to the aims and scope of the journal and has it followed the style guidelines and instructions for authors? Does it make a significant contribution to the existing literature?
5- The journal’s editor fills out the form for the initial examination and choose of the following recommendation: 1) accepting the manuscript and send for peer review, 2) send the manuscript for peer review with the editor’s notes and the proposed amendments sent to the researcher, 3) recommending an apology for publishing the manuscript.
6- In the event of a recommendation to “apologize for publishing the research,” the researcher shall be notified via email with a letter of apology.
7- In the event of acceptance, the editor with the editor-in-chief choose two reviewers (double-blind) to review the manuscript.
8- The manuscript and the review form are sent to the reviewers for peer review, and all manuscripts are subject for peer review to determine their suitability for publication in the journal.
9- Journals ask reviewers to complete their reviews within two weeks, and a reminder is sent to the reviewers after these two weeks.
10- The reviewer responds either (accepting), which is the acceptance of the research for publication without changes, or (accepting the condition of the amendment), which is the acceptance of the research for publication on the terms of making some amendments to it, or (rejection), which is the recommendation to apologize for publishing the research.
11- In case the two reviewers disagree on the decision, the journal sends the research to a weighted reviewer.
12- In the event that the reviewers provide some comments and suggestions about the research, they are sent to the researcher to make the necessary amendments accordingly, provided that they are returned to the journal within a maximum period of two weeks from sending them to him.
13- After making the reviewers’ amendments, the research is sent to the final examiner (a member of the editorial board) to ensure that the researcher has made the necessary amendments and recommend: 1) accepting the research for publication without changes and issuing an acceptance letter, 2) send the research back to the researcher to make the required changes according to reviewers’ report, 3) rejection of the research because the researcher did not make the required changes.
14- The editor sends the final examination report to the editor-in-chief to complete the procedures.
15- In the event of a recommendation to “apologize for publishing the research,” the researcher shall be notified via email with a letter of apology.
16- In the event of a recommendation to “accept the research,” the acceptance letter is sent to the researcher via e-mail.
Rate
Select ratingGive Peer review process 1/5Give Peer review process 2/5Give Peer review process 3/5Give Peer review process 4/5Give Peer review process 5/5Cancel rating
Cancel rating
Give Peer review process 1/5
Give Peer review process 2/5
Give Peer review process 3/5
Give Peer review process 4/5
Give Peer review process 5/5
Report abuse
Configure