Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Guidelines

Journal of Educational Innovation and Language Teaching (JEILT) is a double-blind and peer-reviewed journal, and the reviewers are required to fully understand the following.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

• Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor. JEILT shares many views that all scholars, who wish to contribute to the scientific process must do their fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

• Invited reviewers, who feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

• The Editor-in-Chief must authorize the display or discussion of any manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. This is also true for invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of Objectivity

• To improve manuscript, authors should conduct objective reviews and formulate observations clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate, and the reviewers may reject this.

Acknowledgment of Sources

• Reviewers should locate pertinent published work that the authors have not yet cited. The relevant citation should accompany any statement, observation, derivation, and/or argument reported in previous publications. Reviewers should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

• To contact alternative reviewers, any invited reviewers, who have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, and/or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors, declare their conflicts of interest, and decline the invitation to review.
• Reviewers cannot use the unpublished material from a submitted manuscript in their research without the authors' express written consent. The reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of privileged information or ideas acquired through peer review and refrain from using them for personal gain. This is also true for invited reviewers who decline the review invitation