Peer-reviewing guideline

Peer-Reviewing of the Proceedings

Peer-reviewing plays a critical role in ensuring that only high-quality articles are included in the proceedings. While conference proceedings typically feature a broader range of articles than journals, including original research, reviews, and summaries, it is essential that these publications maintain a high standard. Articles that are poorly written or lack scholarly value will be excluded from the proceedings.

Why is Peer-Reviewing Required for the Proceedings?

At Eduschool Academic Research and Publishers, we understand the importance of conference proceedings in scientific communication. We strive to publish proceedings that contain articles that can be confidently read and cited. To achieve this, volume editors must conduct a thorough peer-review process to ensure the quality of all submissions.

Reviewing Guidelines for Volume Editors

Volume editors and conference organizers have the flexibility to select reviewers, but all reviewers must be qualified experts in the relevant field. The review process must adhere to ethical standards and established norms for academic peer review. A strong peer-review process reflects the quality of the proceedings, enhances their value for indexing, and recognizes the editorial work.

We ask that editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on both technical quality and contribution. The following criteria should be considered when reviewing:

  1. Technical Review

The manuscript should include essential components, such as the title, abstract, keywords, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. Editors and reviewers should assess the manuscript based on the following points:

  • Title: Should accurately and uniquely describe the article, conveying its content clearly.
  • Author Information: Author names, affiliations, and contact details must be properly listed. The corresponding author should be clearly indicated.
  • Abstract: Should be within 300 words, focusing on the objectives, methodology, and key results, providing a complete understanding of the paper in isolation.
  • Keywords: Should be specific to the article’s content and limited to three keywords.
  • Headings/Subheadings: Should be sequentially numbered.
  • Literature Review: Must be recent, comprehensive, and written analytically, focusing on the argument rather than summarizing each source.
  • Clarity and Conciseness: The article should be clear, concise, and easily understandable by the intended audience.
  • Figures and Tables: Should be appropriately numbered and titled, with clear references within the text.
  • Image Quality: All images must be high resolution, with no distortion or blurriness.
  • Tables: Must be created using a table tool, not embedded as images.
  • Equations: Should be written using an equation tool, not embedded as images.
  • References: Properly cited within the text and formatted consistently. References should support the claims made in the manuscript and include recent sources.
  • Conclusion: Should summarize the main findings or concepts, highlighting their significance, limitations, and recommendations.
  • Language: The manuscript should be written in clear, simple English, accurately conveying the intended meaning.
  • Conflict of Interest: A conflict of interest statement should be included at the end of the manuscript.
  1. Contribution Review

In addition to the technical review, volume editors and reviewers should assess the manuscript’s contribution to the field. Consider the following:

  • Originality: The manuscript must be original and not previously published in a refereed journal.
  • New Explanations: Offers fresh perspectives or new interpretations of well-established topics.
  • Clarity: Provides excellent explanations or descriptions of complex subjects.
  • Critical Reviews: Includes thoughtful and well-supported recommendations for future research.
  • Relevance: Provides useful or interesting background information on recent developments in the field.
  • Methodology: Utilizes valid, consistent, and accurate research methods.

References Evaluation

When reviewing the references, consider the following:

  • Are the references appropriate for the topic, and do they include key papers?
  • Is the balance between older and newer citations appropriate?
  • Do the references show that the author is aware of current research?
  • Are the citations accurate and properly aligned with the manuscript’s content?
  • Are there excessive self-citations or citations from only one author or publication?
  • Are there too many citations used to support a single point?

Rejection or Revision

Manuscripts that fail to meet these standards in either technical quality or contribution will be sent back for revision or rejected. Volume editors and reviewers should ensure that only high-quality manuscripts are accepted for publication.

Additional Reading

  • IEEE Referencing Style
  • APA Referencing Style