ADDITIONAL MENU
Peer Review Procces
TORIQIYAH: Journal of Educational Approaches implements a double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review procedure.
All submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous editorial and peer review process consisting of the following stages:
1. Initial Editorial Screening
After submission, the manuscript is evaluated by the editorial team to ensure that it fits within the journal’s scope and complies with the journal’s author guidelines and ethical standards. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be returned to the authors without external review.
2. Plagiarism Screening
All manuscripts are checked using plagiarism detection software to ensure originality and academic integrity. Manuscripts with a high similarity index or evidence of academic misconduct will be rejected.
3. Assignment to Reviewers
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers who have expertise in the relevant field of study.
4. Double-Blind Peer Review
The reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on several criteria, including:
-
Originality and contribution to the field
-
Relevance to the journal’s scope
-
Methodological rigor
-
Clarity of presentation and argumentation
-
Quality of analysis and discussion
Reviewers provide recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication.
5. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor will make one of the following decisions:
-
Accept
-
Minor Revision
-
Major Revision
-
Reject
Authors are required to revise their manuscripts according to the reviewers’ comments before final acceptance.
6. Final Decision
The final decision regarding the publication of the manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief.
The average time for the peer review process is 4–8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the revision process.






