Decision-Making Process

Journal of Curriculum Innovation and Assessment

Editorial Decision-Making Process – JCIA

JCIA maintains a transparent, rigorous, and ethically governed editorial framework to ensure excellence in curriculum development, educational assessment, and pedagogy research.

1. Initial Submission Screening

Preliminary Checks:

  • Adherence to formatting and submission guidelines

  • Complete author declarations (ethics, funding, contributions)

  • Plagiarism detection (similarity >15% may trigger revisions or rejection)

Scope and Relevance Review:
Section Editors verify alignment with educational research, curriculum design, and assessment innovation.

2. Peer Review Process

  • Manuscripts are evaluated through double-blind review by at least two independent reviewers.

  • Reviewers assess originality, research design, methodological rigor, educational relevance, ethical compliance, and clarity.

3. Reviewer Recommendations

  • ✅ Accept as is

  • ✏️ Minor revisions

  • ???? Major revisions

  • ❌ Reject

4. Editorial Evaluation

The Section Editor synthesizes reviewer feedback; if needed, an additional reviewer or editorial board consultation is conducted.

Final Decision: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, Reject.

5. Revisions and Appeals

  • Minor: 2–3 weeks

  • Major: 4–6 weeks, potential re-review

  • Appeals: Submitted in writing; final decision by Editor-in-Chief or independent panel

6. Post-Acceptance Workflow

  • Submission of final manuscript, bios, figures, copyright forms

  • Copyediting and proofs

  • Open-access publication under CC BY-NC 4.0 License

7. Ethical Oversight

  • Conflict of interest disclosure

  • Compliance with human subject research standards

  • Data integrity and academic honesty