Editorial Guidelines

Advances in Educational Studies and Inclusive Practices (AESIP) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of editorial integrity, academic independence, and scholarly excellence. The journal follows internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing and adheres to the ethical principles and Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

These Editorial Policies define the roles, responsibilities, and decision-making processes that govern the editorial management of the journal and ensure transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the publication process.

1. Editorial Governance and Structure

The journal operates under a transparent editorial structure designed to uphold academic quality, ethical publishing standards, and efficient manuscript management.

Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for the scholarly quality, editorial integrity, and strategic direction of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief oversees the peer review process, ensures compliance with publication ethics, and makes the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.

Deputy Editor-in-Chief

The Deputy Editor-in-Chief assists the Editor-in-Chief in managing editorial operations, coordinating manuscript processing, maintaining consistency in editorial decisions, and supporting the overall editorial workflow.

Editors

Editors manage manuscript submissions within their respective areas of expertise. They conduct the initial editorial assessment, oversee the peer review process, evaluate reviewer reports, and provide recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief regarding editorial decisions.

View our Editorial Team & Institutional Affiliations →

External Reviewers

External reviewers are independent subject experts who evaluate submitted manuscripts through a double-blind peer review process. Their objective, confidential, and constructive assessments support the journal in maintaining high scholarly standards.

2. Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on the scholarly merit of submitted manuscripts, including originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, significance, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

The editorial team operates independently of the publisher, sponsors, funding organizations, or commercial interests. Editorial decisions are made without external influence or discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religion, political beliefs, or other non-scholarly considerations.

When members of the editorial board submit manuscripts to the journal, those submissions are managed by an independent editor to ensure a fair, unbiased, and confidential review process.

3. Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and related correspondence as confidential documents throughout the editorial and peer review process.

Unpublished data, ideas, methodologies, or findings obtained through manuscript evaluation must not be used for personal research, publication, or professional advantage without the explicit written consent of the authors.

4. Conflict of Interest

Editors are required to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence their editorial judgment.

Examples of conflicts include personal relationships, institutional affiliations, research collaborations, financial interests, or professional competition with the authors.

Editors with a conflict of interest must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript, which will be reassigned to another qualified editor to ensure an impartial editorial process.

5. Manuscript Evaluation Process

All submitted manuscripts follow a structured editorial workflow designed to ensure fairness, transparency, and scholarly quality.

Initial Editorial Screening

  • Compliance with the journal's aims and scope.
  • Originality and scholarly significance.
  • Adherence to the journal's submission and formatting requirements.
  • Screening for plagiarism and research integrity.
  • Overall suitability for peer review.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these initial requirements may be rejected without external peer review (desk rejection).

Peer Review

Eligible manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process involving at least two independent experts with appropriate subject knowledge.

Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision after considering reviewer reports, editorial assessments, and the authors' responses to reviewer comments where applicable.

Editorial decisions include:

  • Accept
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions Required
  • Reject

6. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding or procedural error may submit a formal appeal supported by evidence.

Appeals, complaints regarding editorial conduct, and publication ethics concerns are handled fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with the procedures recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

7. Ethical Oversight

The editorial team is responsible for identifying, investigating, and responding appropriately to potential breaches of publication ethics, including but not limited to:

  • Plagiarism.
  • Data fabrication or falsification.
  • Duplicate or redundant publication.
  • Improper authorship or contributorship.
  • Citation manipulation.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  • Unethical research involving human participants or animals.

Where concerns arise, investigations will be conducted in accordance with internationally accepted ethical standards and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Appropriate editorial actions, including corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions, will be taken when necessary to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.