Peer Review Process

Education, Innovation and Social Futures (EISF) is committed to maintaining rigorous, fair, transparent, and timely peer-review standards. All research and review manuscripts considered suitable for the journal undergo independent peer review before a final editorial decision is made.

Initial Editorial Assessment

All submissions are initially assessed by the editorial team to determine whether they:

fall within the aims and scope of EISF;
meet the journal's basic scholarly and formatting requirements;
demonstrate sufficient originality, academic quality, and relevance;
comply with research ethics, authorship, and publication ethics requirements; and
are suitable for external peer review.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be declined at the editorial assessment stage without external review.

Double-Anonymous Peer Review

EISF follows a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

Manuscripts proceeding to external review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their subject knowledge, research experience, independence, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Assessment

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts with consideration of:

originality and significance of the contribution;
relevance to the journal's scope;
clarity of the research aims or questions;
appropriateness and rigour of the methodology;
quality of analysis and interpretation;
engagement with relevant literature;
validity of conclusions;
ethical considerations, where applicable; and
clarity, coherence, and scholarly presentation.

Editorial Decisions

Following peer review, the handling editor considers the reviewers' reports and the manuscript as a whole. The editorial decision may be:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

Where reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the editor may seek an additional independent review before making a decision.

Revised Manuscripts

Authors invited to revise their manuscript should provide a revised version together with a clear response addressing the reviewers' and editor's comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when further expert assessment is considered necessary.

Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Where an editor has a conflict of interest involving a submission, responsibility for the manuscript will be transferred to another suitably qualified editor.

Manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's editorial team are subject to the same editorial and peer-review standards as other submissions and will be handled independently by an editor who has no conflict of interest.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to EISF are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process for personal or professional advantage.

Research Integrity

Concerns relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, data integrity, authorship, ethical approval, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of research misconduct may be investigated at any stage of the editorial and peer-review process.

EISF is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions are based on the scholarly quality, originality, methodological rigour, relevance, and integrity of the submitted work, without discrimination based on authors' institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, or other personal characteristics.