Reviewer Guidelines

Dharmas Education Journal (DE_Journal) invites reviewers with relevant academic expertise to evaluate submitted manuscripts and contribute to maintaining the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. Reviewers are expected to conduct their assessments objectively, constructively, confidentially, and within the time frame established by the editor.

1. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two anonymous reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject of the submitted manuscript.

Reviewers should carefully consider their academic expertise and availability before accepting a review assignment. If a reviewer does not have sufficient expertise or is unable to complete the review within the required period, they should promptly inform the editor.

2. General Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

  1. Originality: The manuscript presents original ideas, findings, or scholarly contributions.

  2. Relevance: The topic is relevant to the focus and scope of DE_Journal.

  3. Scientific Significance: The manuscript provides meaningful contributions to the development of educational knowledge and practice.

  4. Methodological Appropriateness: The research methods are appropriate and adequately explained.

  5. Accuracy of Findings: The analysis, interpretation, and conclusions are supported by the information and evidence presented.

  6. Clarity of Presentation: The manuscript is logically organized, clearly written, and understandable.

  7. References: The cited literature is relevant and adequately supports the arguments and discussion.

3. Review Procedure

Reviewers are expected to follow these procedures:

  1. Read the entire manuscript carefully and assess its academic quality.

  2. Evaluate the manuscript according to the journal's review criteria.

  3. Identify strengths, weaknesses, and aspects that require improvement.

  4. Provide clear, specific, and constructive comments to help authors improve their manuscripts.

  5. Submit the review results and recommendations to the editor through the journal's OJS platform or the communication channel provided by the editor.

4. Reviewer Recommendations

After evaluating a manuscript, reviewers provide recommendations to assist the editor in making an editorial decision. The recommendations may include:

  • Accept: The manuscript meets the journal's requirements and is suitable for publication.

  • Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor corrections or improvements.

  • Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication.

  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's academic or publication requirements.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the editor, taking into consideration the reviewers' recommendations and the editorial evaluation.

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all manuscripts and information received during the review process. Manuscripts must not be disclosed, copied, or used for personal or professional purposes.

Reviewers must also:

  • Maintain objectivity and avoid personal bias.

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the editor.

  • Identify relevant published works that have not been appropriately cited.

  • Inform the editor of suspected plagiarism or other potential publication ethics violations.

  • Provide comments in a respectful, professional, and constructive manner.

6. Review Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to complete and submit their evaluations within the deadline specified by the editor. If additional time is required, reviewers should communicate with the editor as early as possible.

7. Communication with the Editor

All review reports, recommendations, and concerns regarding a manuscript must be communicated to the editor. Reviewers should not contact authors directly regarding the manuscript unless explicitly authorized by the editor.

DE_Journal appreciates the contribution of reviewers in supporting a fair, objective, and academically rigorous peer-review process.