Peer Review Policy

The International Women Online Journal of Distance Education (intWOJDE) adheres to a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the highest academic quality and maintain editorial standards. This policy outlines the review procedures, timeline, and criteria that govern the evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

Review Model

intWOJDE employs a Double-Blind Peer Review system, where both the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This approach ensures unbiased evaluation based solely on the academic merit, originality, and contribution of the manuscript.

The journal follows best practices and guidelines recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). While intWOJDE is not a formal COPE member, our editorial processes align with COPE's ethical guidelines for peer review and publication practices.

Review Process Stages

All submitted manuscripts undergo a multi-stage evaluation process designed to ensure quality, relevance, and adherence to academic standards.

Stage 1: Initial Screening

Upon submission, the Editorial Board conducts an initial assessment to evaluate:

• Relevance to the journal's scope and aims
• Compliance with submission guidelines and formatting requirements
• Originality and potential contribution to the field
• Basic quality standards (language, structure, completeness)

Manuscripts that do not meet these initial criteria may be returned to authors without peer review. The approximate duration of initial screening is 21 days from the date of submission.

Stage 2: Peer Review

Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers who are selected based on their expertise in the manuscript's subject area. Reviewers are chosen from:

• The International Editorial Board
• External experts with relevant academic credentials
• Scholars with demonstrated expertise in the manuscript's topic

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Academic rigor and methodological soundness
• Originality and contribution to the field
• Clarity of presentation and writing quality
• Appropriateness of references and citations
• Relevance to distance education and open learning contexts

The approximate duration of the peer review stage is 90 days from the date of assignment to reviewers. Reviewers provide detailed written reports with recommendations: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

Stage 3: Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' reports and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection. In cases of conflicting reviews, additional reviewers may be consulted.

Possible editorial decisions:

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication with minor or no revisions required.
• Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor corrections or clarifications before acceptance.
• Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and will undergo a second round of review.
• Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or scope requirements.

Authors receive detailed feedback from reviewers and editorial comments to guide revisions when applicable.

Stage 4: Publication

Accepted manuscripts are prepared for publication. The approximate time from acceptance to publication is 180 days from the original submission date. Articles are published in the next available issue of the journal, which is published biannually (April and October).

Reviewer Selection Criteria

Reviewers are selected based on the following criteria to ensure high-quality, expert evaluation:

• Academic Qualifications: Reviewers hold advanced degrees (Ph.D. or equivalent) in relevant fields related to distance education, open learning, educational technology, or women's studies.
• Research Expertise: Demonstrated expertise and publication record in the manuscript's subject area.
• Institutional Affiliation: Reviewers are affiliated with recognized academic institutions or research organizations. The journal values diversity in reviewer affiliations, including both domestic and international institutions.
• No Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest, including personal, professional, or financial relationships with authors or their institutions.
• Review Experience: Preference is given to reviewers with prior experience in peer review processes, though emerging scholars are also considered.

The journal maintains a database of qualified reviewers and continuously seeks to expand its reviewer pool to ensure diverse perspectives and expertise coverage.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

• Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback
• Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process
• Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment
• Evaluate manuscripts based on academic merit, not personal opinions
• Submit review reports within the agreed timeframe
• Identify potential ethical concerns or plagiarism issues

Reviewers who consistently provide high-quality reviews may be invited to join the Editorial Board.

Review Timeline Summary

The following timeline represents approximate durations and may vary depending on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, and revision requirements:

Note: These timelines are approximate and may be extended in cases of complex revisions, reviewer unavailability, or exceptional circumstances. Authors will be notified of any significant delays.

Appeal Process

Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly rejected may submit an appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of receiving the rejection decision. Appeals must provide a clear justification and address the specific concerns raised in the review reports. The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may request additional expert opinions if deemed necessary. The decision on appeals is final.

Confidentiality

All parties involved in the peer review process—authors, reviewers, and editors—are required to maintain strict confidentiality. Manuscripts under review are considered privileged documents and must not be shared, discussed, or cited without explicit permission. Reviewers' identities remain confidential unless they choose to disclose their names upon publication.

International Women Online Journal of Distance Education (intWOJDE)

ISSN: 2147-0367 | Founded: 2012

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2012–2025 intWOJDE