GRTJEST
For Reviewers
Guidelines for peer reviewers of GRTJEST: review criteria, timelines, confidentiality and ethics.
Thank you for reviewing
Peer review is the backbone of GRTJEST. Reviewers safeguard the scholarly record by offering constructive, evidence-based assessments of submitted manuscripts.
Review criteria
- Originality — does the work add something new to education, science or technology scholarship?
- Methodology — is the design appropriate, and are methods described well enough to be replicated?
- Analysis & evidence — are the claims supported by the data presented?
- Literature — is prior work engaged with fairly and adequately cited?
- Clarity — is the manuscript well structured, readable and free of ambiguity?
- Ethics — is there evidence of plagiarism, data fabrication or undisclosed conflicts?
Timeline
- Respond to an invitation within 5 days.
- Submit the completed review within 21 days of acceptance.
- Contact the editorial office early if you need an extension.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts under review are privileged communications. Do not share, cite, or use the content for any purpose, and do not involve a colleague in the review without prior editorial approval.
Recommendations
Reviewers may recommend Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Please provide separate comments to the editor and to the authors, and keep author-facing comments courteous and specific.
Conflicts of interest
Decline the invitation if you have collaborated with the authors in the last three years, share an institution, or have any financial or personal interest in the outcome.