PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Manuscripts submitted to Wisdom: Journal of Primary Education undergo a rigorous and transparent review process to ensure high academic quality and ethical integrity. The review process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial team to ensure alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, adherence to the author guidelines and manuscript template, and the overall academic suitability of the submission. At this stage, the editors also assess the clarity of the research objectives, relevance to primary education, and the appropriateness of the research design or theoretical framework.
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected without further review.

2. Plagiarism and Similarity Check

Every manuscript is screened using plagiarism detection software to ensure originality. The maximum similarity index allowed is 20%, excluding references and properly cited quotations.
Manuscripts exceeding this threshold may be rejected. If the similarity index is within an acceptable range but raises concerns, authors may be asked to revise or provide clarification.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be sent to at least two independent reviewers through a double-blind peer review process. In this system, reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on several criteria, including:

  1. The originality and contribution of the study to primary education

  2. The relevance and strength of the theoretical or conceptual framework

  3. The appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology

  4. The quality and depth of analysis, results, and discussion

  5. The clarity of conclusions and their implications for research and practice in primary education

4. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations, the editorial team will make one of the following decisions:

  • Rejected

  • Major Revisions Required

  • Minor Revisions Required

  • Accepted

The decision, along with anonymized reviewer comments, will be communicated to the author.

5. Revision Stage

If revisions are required, the manuscript will be returned to the author for improvement. Authors are expected to revise their manuscript carefully in response to reviewer comments and submit a revised version within the specified timeframe.
Manuscripts returned after three months may be treated as new submissions.

6. Final Decision

After the revised manuscript is resubmitted, the editor will evaluate whether the revisions adequately address the reviewers’ comments. In some cases, the revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.