EJES strives to reduce the timeframe of the selection of a reviewer and the initial screening of the submissions. In addition, the peer review procedure is described in details. Moreover, we encourage authors to follow the author’s guidelines and the EJES template . Proper submission would facilitate the entire process.
EJES accepts research articles and literature reviews in the area of pedagogy and educational sciences.
Please use our article template and stick to the following standards when submitting your paper.
• All articles must be in English language.
• Recommended article length is 7-20 pages.
• Authors should submit their manuscripts via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org and email@example.com .
• The corresponding author would receive a confirmation for the submission within 12 hours.
EJES Peer Review Procedure
EJES editorial board is mainly consisted of authors who have already published their papers in the journal.
Every member of the editorial board has his or her own profile, which includes their academic domain, academic affiliation, number of review reports conducted for EJES, and the month or year of joining the EJES editorial board. At EJES, we maintain a list of active reviewers only, who are in regular communication with the editorial office. We would also like to thank our former members who have contributed significantly to the development of the journal.
EJES is striving to decrease the time for the initial screening of the submitted papers and selection of a reviewer. Through the consistent support and feedback from the EJES reviewers, we have succeeded in including the following phases within a decent timeframe.
EJES Reviewers are instructed not to estimate the potential impact of a paper in a given field nor its novelty. These subjective judgments can delay the publication of a work, which later proves to be of major significance. At EJES, we believe that the publication readership is in the most suitable position to determine what is of interest to them.
EJES promotes a rigorous peer review procedure on the basis of scientific validity and the technical quality of the paper. Every single paper submitted to the EJES undergoes a rigorous peer review procedure by at least two EJES reviewers. However, the academic editor is allowed to ask for additional review reports from author-suggested reviewers but only as additional review reports.
Suggested review form
1. After the submission, the corresponding author is asked to clarify that the paper has not been published elsewhere; to contact the editorial office using his/her institutional email address and confirm that he/she had thoroughly revised and agreed with the EJES publication policies.
2. The manuscript is screened for basic technical requirements.
3. The corresponding author receives a confirmation E-mail, informing him/her whether or not the manuscript has been properly structured.
4. Even though the authors are responsible for potential plagiarized content, the editorial office, by using Antiplagiarism.net software, scans the content of the paper for plagiarism.
5. The editorial office reserves the right to return to authors, without peer-review, improperly formatted manuscripts or non-authorized submissions.
6. The manuscript undergoes initial screening by the associate editor, including comments on its structure and the language aspect, and the managing editor identifies potential reviewers.
7. EJES reviewers for the manuscript are assigned.
8. The identity of the reviewers is anonymous, except for those who are willing to disclose their identity under the “open review” process.
9. The academic editor decides whether reviews from additional experts are needed or the review reports are sufficient for a decision. Author-suggested reviewers are also acceptable but only as additional review reports.
10. All of the EJES reviewers are familiar with the EJES peer review policy. Their awareness of the necessity of a prompt response on whether or not they are able to conduct/manage a review in a given moment is noted in the invitation.
11. Every single paper submitted to the EJES undergoes a rigorous peer review procedure by at least two EJES reviewers.
12. When the reports are received, the academic editor and the editorial office make the final decision. The time of the peer review completion depends on many circumstances. Even though we strive to provide peer review in a decent timeframe, fast publication cannot be guaranteed.
There are several types of decision possible. They include:
– Accept the manuscript as submitted;
– Accept it with minor revision;
– Accept it with major revision; and
– Reject the manuscript because it does not meet the journal criteria.
EJES is a peer-reviewed journal and all the papers submitted undergo a single blind peer review process. The latter means that reviewers know the identity of the authors, but authors do not necessarily know the reviewer’s identity.
In order to enhance transparency of the peer review process, EJES, starting from 2019, has introduced an “open review procedure”.
The result of the “open review” initiative is to publicly announce the review report of the accepted paper, along with its full content. In this regard, author’s approval has a key role to play in the development of this process.
Furthermore, we hereby encourage all reviewers to reveal their names on the EJES evaluation form, and approve that their names can be made available on the EJES`s website.
All EJES articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License. With this license, authors retain copyright to their manuscript, but allow any user to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt, and make commercial use of the work without needing to provide additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source. However, first publication rights are granted to the publisher. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent usage of the work. It is the author’s responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.
Plagiarism is not acceptable in the EJES submissions and publications. After the submission, authors are requested to declare the originality of their work by properly citing, re-using, or copying previous publications. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript would be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the publisher has the right to issue an erratum/corrigendum or retract of the paper. The editorial office makes use of plagiarism checker software (AntiPlagiarism.NET) to confirm the originality of submitted papers.
As of May 2016, EJES uses Portico as an archiving solution. Portico is among the largest community-supported digital archives in the world. Working with libraries and publishers, they preserve e-journals, e-books, and other electronic scholarly content to ensure researchers and students have access to it in the future.
Moreover, along the online content, every EJES edition appears in print version. It also represents a preservation solution. Many hard copies have already been disseminated to Universities and individuals around the world.
EJES Ethics Committee
This committee is consisted of the EJES Managing Editor, Editor-in-Chief, and associate editor. It is chaired by the Managing Editor. Its primary role is to cope with the complaints received by the editorial office.
Within 7 days of a reception, the EJES Managing Editor shall forward the complaint to all the committee members and other interested parties.
The committee members shall discuss the validity of the complaint and express their opinion within two (2) weeks of its reception.
If necessary, the Managing Editor will include EJES reviewers in the process to obtain their opinion. Opinions from advisory editors may also be required.
Within four (4) weeks from the reception, final decision on the complaint will be made and sent to the parties. This timeframe might be prolonged in specific cases.
Conflict of Interest
Authors, reviewers, or editorial members have to disclose every situation or connection, which could potentially affect the impartial review and publication procedure by informing the Managing Editor.
If the paper is accepted for publication, author(s) will be asked to pay 97 Euros as article publication fee, in order to defray the operating costs such as review management, website maintenance and archiving, printing hard copies and delivery.
Author(s) will be entitled to one printed copy per author free-of-charge, but not more than two copies per paper. Authors can also get additional copies of the printed journal by paying 20 EUR for each additional copy.
ONLINE PAYMENT!!! (Please check the following link)
Authors can publish their articles and book reviews, after a review by our editorial board. Our mission is to provide greater and faster flow of the newest scientific thought. EJES’s role is to be a kind of a bridge between the educational sciences researchers in Europe and around the world. The “European Journal of Educational Sciences” is open to any researchers, regardless of their geographical origin, race, nationality, religion or gender as long as they have an adequate scientific paper. EJES encourages a vigorous dialogue between educational scholars and practitioners. The European Journal of Educational Sciences publishes original empirical and theoretical studies and analyses in education that constitute significant contributions to the understanding of educational processes and outcomes. Original research is interpreted broadly to include policy analyses, development of research methodologies and reviews of research that contribute new insights and understandings.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice
Any departures from the above-defined rules should be reported as a complaint directly to the ELP editorial office and its ELP Ethics Committee. The ELP Ethics Committee consists of the ELP Managing Editor, Editor–in–Chief, and the associate editor. This body is unequivocally committed to providing swift resolutions to any of such types of problems. It can also contact experts and ELP reviewers in a given field for their opinion and recommendations on a specific case.