Peer Reviewer Process

EduMatrix: International Journal of Mathematics Education employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and relevance of all published manuscripts. Each submission is evaluated objectively and confidentially by qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in mathematics education and related fields.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the Editorial Office to assess its suitability for further peer review. The screening considers:

• alignment with the journal’s aims and scope;
• originality and potential scholarly contribution;
• compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and manuscript requirements;
• academic and methodological quality;
• plagiarism and similarity level;
• adherence to applicable research and publication ethics; and
• clarity and completeness of the manuscript.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected without being sent for external peer review. The initial screening does not constitute a final assessment of the manuscript’s scholarly merit.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a minimum of two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area. The journal applies a double-blind review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on established academic and scholarly criteria, including:

• originality and novelty;
• significance and relevance of the research;
• theoretical foundation and literature review;
• appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology;
• validity and reliability of data analysis;
• accuracy and coherence of the findings and discussion;
• quality and relevance of references;
• clarity, organization, and academic presentation; and
• contribution to the advancement of mathematics education theory, research, or practice.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, and evidence-based comments to assist authors in improving the quality of their manuscripts.

3. Revision Process

When revisions are required, authors are expected to address all reviewer comments carefully and provide a clear point-by-point response explaining how each issue has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly when substantial revisions are required.

The Editor may request additional revisions when necessary to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal’s academic and editorial standards.

4. Editorial Decision

After considering the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief or designated Editor makes the final editorial decision. The possible decisions are:

• Accept – the manuscript is accepted for publication without further substantive revision;
• Minor Revision – the manuscript requires limited revisions before a final decision can be made;
• Major Revision – substantial revisions are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo further peer review; or
• Reject – the manuscript does not meet the journal’s academic, methodological, ethical, or editorial standards.

The Editor-in-Chief retains final responsibility and authority for all publication decisions. Editorial decisions are based on the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript and are not determined solely by a single reviewer’s recommendation.

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Standards

All manuscripts and peer review reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information contained in submitted manuscripts for personal or professional purposes.

Reviewers are also required to declare any potential conflict of interest and should decline the review assignment when their impartiality may be compromised. The journal is committed to maintaining principles of fairness, confidentiality, academic integrity, and publication ethics throughout the peer review process.