The Journal of Curriculum Innovation and Assessment (JCIA) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality, integrity, and transparency through a rigorous and fair peer review process. The journal ensures that all submitted manuscripts are evaluated objectively and contribute meaningfully to the fields of curriculum development, educational innovation, and assessment practices.
JCIA follows a double-blind peer review system, ensuring that:
The identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential
Manuscripts are assessed solely on academic merit, originality, and relevance
Each submission is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field of education and curriculum studies.
Before peer review, all manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to assess:
Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
Compliance with author guidelines and formatting requirements
Plagiarism screening (maximum similarity threshold of 19%)
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without being sent for external review.
Reviewers are selected based on:
Expertise in curriculum studies, education, or assessment
Academic qualifications and research experience
Absence of conflicts of interest
The editorial board ensures that reviewers provide fair, unbiased, and constructive evaluations.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:
Originality and contribution to curriculum innovation and assessment
Theoretical foundation and methodological rigor
Relevance to current educational challenges and practices
Clarity, organization, and academic writing quality
Validity of results, findings, and conclusions
Reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed feedback to support authors in improving their work.
Reviewers are typically given 2–4 weeks to complete their evaluations. The editorial office works to ensure timely processing and effective communication with authors.
Based on reviewer reports, the editor may make one of the following decisions:
Accept
Minor Revisions
Major Revisions
Reject
Authors receive a formal decision along with anonymized reviewer comments.
Authors are required to:
Address all reviewer comments carefully
Submit a revised manuscript within the specified timeframe
Provide a detailed, point-by-point response to reviewer feedback
Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review if necessary.
All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents
Reviewers must not use unpublished material for personal or professional benefit
Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed immediately
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal request with justification. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, if required, independent reviewers.
JCIA is dedicated to maintaining a transparent, efficient, and high-quality peer review process that supports academic excellence and contributes to the advancement of curriculum innovation and assessment research.
Journal Information:
