Peer Review Process

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. 

Manuscript articles submitted online to SITTAH: Journal of Primary Education will be checked by the board of editors regarding scope, in-house style, and plagiarism. The manuscript that qualifies the focus and scope of SITTAH: Journal of Primary Education will be continued to the review process, which, at least, will be reviewed by reviewers with double-blind commitment. The reviewer is a journal partner from the experts who are concerned about the field of the journal. The editor will send an e-mail to the chosen reviewer about the manuscript's title and content and the invitation to log in to the journal website to finish the review process. The reviewer logs in to the journal website to approve the review, download the manuscript, send their comment, and choose the recommendation. The result will be returned to the author to be followed up. 


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.