Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation

Peer Review Process

Sustainable Education and Digital Transformation (SEDT) implements a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic integrity and scientific quality. In this process, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential to ensure an unbiased evaluation of the research.

1. Preliminary Review (Desk Review)

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor. At this stage, the following criteria are assessed:

  • Scope Fit: Does the study align with the journal's focus on education systems and digital transformation?

  • Originality: Manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using iThenticate or Turnitin. A high similarity index may lead to immediate rejection.

  • Technical Compliance: Does the manuscript follow the Author Guidelines (APA 7th, formatting, blinded file)?

2. External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary review are assigned to at least two independent subject-matter experts. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the specific area of education or technology addressed in the paper.

  • Reviewers evaluate the study’s methodology, theoretical framework, systemic implications, and contribution to the field.

  • The reviewers’ identities are never disclosed to the authors, and vice versa.

3. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is ready for publication as is.

  • Minor Revision: Small changes are required before final approval.

  • Major Revision: Significant structural or methodological improvements are needed; the paper will likely undergo a second round of review.

  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or is outside its scope.

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial interests or external parties.

4. Revision and Final Approval

Authors are expected to submit their revised manuscript along with a "Response to Reviewers" document. The Editor conducts a final check to ensure all concerns have been addressed before sending the paper to the production phase.

Reviewer Criteria & Ethical Standards

SEDT adheres to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers are expected to:

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript’s content.

  • Provide constructive, objective, and evidence-based feedback.

Average Processing Time

We value our authors' time and strive for efficiency. The following timelines are indicative and may vary depending on the review process:

  • Time to First Decision: 4–6 weeks.

  • Total Review Cycle: 8–12 weeks.