Peer Review Policy

Journal of Transformative Pedagogies and Learner Engagement (JTPLE), published by Synergy Publication, is committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly quality, fairness, transparency, and ethical integrity in academic publishing.

All submitted manuscripts—except editorials, invited commentaries, and book reviews—undergo rigorous peer review in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) best practices, and relevant University Grants Commission (UGC) parameters for peer-reviewed journals.

Type of Peer Review

JTPLE employs a double-blind (double-anonymous) peer review process, whereby:

  • The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers

  • The identities of reviewers are concealed from authors

This approach is designed to minimize potential bias related to gender, institutional affiliation, nationality, career stage, or reputation, and to promote fair and objective evaluation based solely on scholarly merit.

Peer Review Process

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Associate Editor conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript:

  • Falls within the journal’s aims and scope

  • Meets baseline standards of originality, clarity, and scholarly relevance

  • Complies with submission and ethical guidelines, including the <10% similarity threshold in accordance with UGC plagiarism regulations

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk-rejected without external review, typically within 7–14 days of submission.

2. Assignment to Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with appropriate subject and methodological expertise.

Reviewer selection prioritizes:

  • Scholarly competence and subject relevance

  • Diversity of perspectives

  • Absence of conflicts of interest (e.g., shared institutional affiliation, recent collaboration, or personal relationships)

3. Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and significance of the contribution

  • Relevance to transformative pedagogies and learner engagement

  • Theoretical and/or methodological rigor

  • Clarity, coherence, and quality of presentation

  • Ethical soundness, including attention to equity and social justice where relevant

  • Potential impact on educational theory, policy, or practice

Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommend one of the following outcomes:

  • Accept

  • Minor revisions

  • Major revisions

  • Reject

4. Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or handling editor makes the final decision, taking into account reviewers’ reports and ensuring consistency and fairness.

In cases of substantially divergent reviews, an additional reviewer may be consulted. Authors are normally notified of the editorial decision within 8–12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability.

5. Revisions

Authors submitting revised manuscripts must include a detailed, point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation when substantial changes have been made.

6. Final Acceptance

Only manuscripts that satisfactorily address reviewer feedback and meet JTPLE’s scholarly, ethical, and editorial standards are accepted for publication.

Transparency and Timelines

  • This peer review policy is publicly available on the journal website

  • Average time to first decision: 8–12 weeks

  • Average time from submission to publication: 4–6 months (subject to revision cycles)

  • Dates of submission, acceptance, and publication are displayed on each published article

Reviewer Responsibilities and Recognition

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest

  • Maintain strict confidentiality

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations

  • Avoid personal or derogatory criticism

Reviewers may receive recognition for their service, including:

  • Annual public acknowledgment (with consent)

  • Integration with platforms such as Publons or ReviewerCredits, where applicable

  • Reviewer certificates upon request

Editorial Independence and Ethical Oversight

  • Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial, institutional, or personal interests

  • Special issues are subject to the same rigorous double-blind peer review process

  • Publication by editors or editorial board members are minimized and transparently disclosed

  • JTPLE follows COPE procedures for handling appeals, disputes, and allegations of misconduct