Reviewer Guideline

Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process

Blind peer-review is a method applied to publish scientific publications with the highest quality. This method forms the basis of the objective evaluation process of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals. The opinions of the referees have a decisive place in the publication quality of International Journal of Unique Glance at Education (IJUGE). All studies submitted to International Journal of Unique Glance at Education (IJUGE) are blindly evaluated according to the following stages.

Blind Refereeing Type

International Journal of Unique Glance at Education (IJUGE) uses the double-blind method in the evaluation process of all studies. In the double-blind method, the identities of the authors and referees of the studies are hidden.

Initial Evaluation Process

Studies submitted to International Journal of Unique Glance at Education (IJUGE) are first evaluated by the editors. At this stage, studies that do not comply with the purpose and scope of the journal, are weak in terms of language and expression rules in Turkish and English, contain scientifically critical errors, have no original value, and do not meet the publication policies are rejected. Authors of rejected studies are notified within one month at the latest from the date of submission. Studies that are found suitable are sent to a field editor for the relevant field for preliminary evaluation.

Preliminary Evaluation Process

In the preliminary evaluation process, field editors examine the introduction and literature, method, findings, conclusion, evaluation and discussion sections of the studies in detail in terms of journal publication policies and scope and originality. Studies that are not found suitable as a result of this examination are returned together with the field editor evaluation report within one month at the latest. Studies that are found suitable are included in the refereeing process.

Refereeing Process

The studies are refereed according to the content and the expertise of the referees. The field editor examining the study proposes at least two referees from the referee pool according to their fields of expertise or may suggest new referees suitable for the field of the study. The referee suggestions from the field editor are evaluated by the editors and the studies are forwarded to the referees. The referees have to guarantee that they will not share any process and document about the studies they evaluate.

Referee Reports

Peer-reviews of the studies in general; It is based on originality, method used, compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings and results, and review of the literature. This review is based on the following elements:

1. Introduction and literature: Evaluation report includes views on the presentation and objectives of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the subject, the scope of the literature on the subject, its currency and originality of the study.
2. Method: The evaluation report includes information about the suitability of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, validity and reliability, as well as an opinion on the data collection and analysis process.
3. Findings: The evaluation report includes opinions on the presentation of the findings obtained within the framework of the method, the accuracy of the analysis methods, the consistency of the findings with the objectives of the research, the presentation of the needed tables, figures and visuals, and the conceptual evaluation of the tests used.
4. Evaluation and discussion: The evaluation report includes discussion of the subject based on the findings, compliance with the research question/s and hypothesis/s, generalizability and applicability.
5. Conclusion and recommendations: The evaluation report includes opinions on contributions to the literature, suggestions for future studies and applications in the field.
6. Style and expression: The evaluation report contains an opinion on the content of the study title, the proper use of Turkish, and the use of references and references in accordance with the language of the full text in accordance with APA 7 rules.
7. General evaluation: The evaluation report includes an opinion on the originality of the study as a whole, its contribution to the educational literature and practices in the field.

During the evaluation process, the referees are not expected to make corrections according to the typographic features of the study.

Peer Review Process

The time given to the referees for the referee evaluation process is 6 weeks. Correction suggestions from referees or editors must be completed by the authors within 1 month in line with the correction instructions. Referees can examine the corrections of a study and decide whether it is appropriate or request more than one correction if necessary.

Evaluation Result

Opinions from the referees are reviewed by the field editor within 2 weeks at the latest. As a result of this review, the field editor conveys his final decision on the study to the editors.

Editorial Board Decision

The editors prepare the opinions of the editorial board about the study based on the opinions of the field editor and the referee. The prepared opinions are conveyed to the author(s) by the editor, together with the suggestions of the field editor and the referee, within 1 week at the latest. In this process, studies that have negative opinions are returned without requesting a plagiarism check. The final decision for the studies with positive opinion is made according to the results of the plagiarism inspection reports.