Journal of Education and Human Development

Peer Review Policy

At the Brooklyn Research and Publishing Institute (BRPI), we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, and rigor in the peer review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo a formal peer review to ensure scholarly excellence, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

1. Review Models: Double-Blind and Single Review

BRPI employs one of the two peer review models, depending on the nature of the journal and the subject matter of the submitted manuscript:

Double-Blind Peer Review: The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to ensure objectivity and eliminate potential bias.

Single Peer Review: In some cases—particularly in niche or highly specialized fields—a single expert reviewer may be assigned. However, the process remains fully blind, meaning the identities of both the reviewer and the author are kept confidential.

In all cases, reviewer anonymity is strictly preserved, and authors are never informed of the reviewers’ identities during the review process.

2. Reviewer Selection and Evaluation Criteria

Each manuscript submitted to a BRPI journal is evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers under the double-blind peer review model, and by one independent reviewer in cases where the single-reviewer model is applied. Reviewers are carefully selected by the editorial team based on their demonstrated expertise in the subject area, strong academic credentials, and relevant publication history. Additionally, reviewers must have a solid understanding of the journal’s disciplinary focus and methodological approaches to ensure a thorough and informed assessment.

During the peer review process, reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to several key criteria. These include the originality of the research and its contribution to the field, the soundness of the methodology and research design, and the clarity and coherence of the manuscript’s presentation. Reviewers also assess the significance and relevance of the work to the journal’s scope, as well as the accuracy of data interpretation and the appropriateness of referencing. This comprehensive evaluation ensures that all published work meets the highest academic standards.

Reviewer Suggestions by Authors (Optional)

Authors are encouraged to suggest potential peer reviewers at the time of manuscript submission. Proposed reviewers should be experts in the relevant field and must have no conflict of interest with the authors. For each suggested reviewer, authors should provide the full name, institutional affiliation, and a professional email address. While all reviewer suggestions will be carefully considered by the editorial team, their inclusion does not guarantee selection. The final decision regarding the choice of reviewers rests solely with the editorial board to ensure an objective and unbiased review process.

3. Transparency and Reviewer Acknowledgement

BRPI is committed to fostering transparency in scholarly communication and upholding the integrity of the peer review process. To that end, we take the distinctive step of publicly acknowledging our reviewers for their contributions. Upon final publication, reviewer information is included—where applicable—in both the review report shared with the authors and on the published article’s webpage. The details typically provided include the reviewer’s full name, ORCID iD, and institutional email address. In some cases, and only with explicit permission, a contact number may also be listed. This transparent practice not only enhances accountability but also ensures that reviewers receive appropriate recognition for their valuable role in maintaining academic quality and integrity.

4. Review Timeline and Decision Process

The standard peer review process at BRPI typically takes 2 to 3 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript. Certain journals may offer an accelerated review cycle of up to two weeks for select submissions that meet specific editorial criteria.

Step 1: The review process begins with an initial editorial screening to evaluate the manuscript’s relevance to the journal and its compliance with submission guidelines.

Step 2: Suitable manuscripts are then assigned to qualified reviewer(s) based on subject expertise.

Step 3: Reviewer(s) provide detailed evaluations and recommendations, which may lead to one of the four editorial decisions: Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject.

Step 4: If revisions are required, the revised manuscript is generally sent back to the same reviewer(s) to ensure consistency and maintain quality control.

Step 5: The final decision is made by the editorial board, taking into account all reviewer feedback and the overall suitability of the manuscript for publication.

5. Post-Acceptance and Publication

Once a manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author is notified and requested to pay the applicable publication fee. The author is informed of the anticipated online publication date.

6. Commitment to Ethical Review

BRPI is committed to upholding internationally recognized standards of peer review and publishing ethics, in alignment with the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All reviews are conducted with fairness, confidentiality, and academic integrity.