Peer Review and Editorial Process

Datokarama English Education Journal (DEEJournal) applies a transparent, structured, and ethically grounded editorial and peer review process in accordance with the principles and best practices set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This process is designed to ensure fairness, academic rigor, and accountability at all stages of manuscript handling, from submission to publication.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are processed exclusively through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, which serves as the sole medium for editorial communication, documentation, and decision-making.

Workflow Overview

Manuscript Submission

Authors are required to register and submit their manuscripts through the journal’s OJS platform. Submissions must conform to the journal’s Author Guidelines, fall within the scope of English language education, linguistics, or literature, and demonstrate academic originality. All manuscripts are screened for text similarity using plagiarism detection software prior to further processing.

Initial Screening

Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial technical and editorial screening conducted by the Managing Editor. This stage evaluates alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with author guidelines, text similarity, and basic standards of academic presentation and clarity. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk rejected or returned to the authors for technical correction before further consideration.

Editorial Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, who assigns them to a Section Editor based on subject expertise. In exceptional circumstances, such as potential conflicts of interest, the Editor-in-Chief may retain direct oversight of the manuscript.

Preliminary Editorial Assessment

The assigned Section Editor conducts an initial scholarly evaluation of the manuscript, focusing on its academic contribution, methodological soundness, clarity of argumentation, and language quality. At this stage, the editor may recommend rejection, request preliminary revisions from the author, or proceed to external peer review.

Reviewer Selection and Invitation

Manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review are evaluated through a double-blind review process. The Section Editor invites at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are expected to confirm or decline the invitation within a specified timeframe. If an invitation is declined or unanswered, alternative reviewers are selected to ensure timely evaluation.

Peer Review

Reviewers are required to assess the manuscript objectively, confidentially, and without conflicts of interest. Reviews are conducted using the journal’s official review form and are expected to include substantive comments, critical evaluation, and, where appropriate, annotated feedback on the manuscript. Reviewers typically complete their evaluations within two to four weeks and provide one of the following recommendations: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Section Editor formulates an editorial recommendation, which is reviewed and finalized by the Editor-in-Chief. Editorial decisions are communicated to the author through the OJS platform and may include acceptance, a request for minor or major revisions, or rejection accompanied by a reasoned explanation.

Revision and Re-evaluation

Authors invited to revise their manuscripts are required to address all reviewer and editorial comments systematically. Revised submissions must be accompanied by a detailed response to reviewers outlining how each point has been addressed. For major revisions, the manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation. For minor revisions, the Section Editor may assess the revision directly.

Final Decision

Once all academic and ethical requirements have been satisfied, the Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor issues a final decision of acceptance. The decision is formally recorded and communicated through the system.

Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage, which includes professional copyediting, proofreading, and layout formatting. Authors are provided with a final proof for verification of minor corrections prior to publication. Upon completion, the article is published online, assigned a DOI, and included in the scheduled journal issue.

Roles and Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for preparing original manuscripts, responding to editorial and reviewer feedback, and approving final proofs. Reviewers contribute by providing timely, confidential, and constructive evaluations. The Editor-in-Chief oversees the editorial process and makes final publication decisions. The Managing Editor coordinates workflow and production, while Section Editors manage content evaluation and peer review. Copyeditors ensure clarity, consistency, and adherence to journal style.

Ethical Standards

DEEJournal adheres strictly to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Editors, Reviewers, and Authors. All submissions are handled confidentially, impartially, and transparently, with appropriate measures in place to manage conflicts of interest and uphold academic integrity.

For further details, please consult the journal’s Publication Ethics, Reviewer Guidelines, Editorial Structure, and Author Guidelines pages.