Peer review process

The Journal of Turkish Science Education  is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal.

 

The Journal of Turkish Science Education (TUSED) is a strictly double-blind, external peer-reviewed journal.

1. Submission of manuscript The corresponding author submits the manuscript to the journal via the online submission system. The author must use the official manuscript template file provided by TUSED.

2. Editorial office assessment The editorial office checks that the manuscript adheres to the formatting and structural requirements described in the Author Guidelines. The scientific quality of the manuscript is not assessed at this point.

3. Editor-in-Chief assessment The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript considering its scope, originality, ethical compliance, and overall publishability. The Editor-in-Chief may decline the manuscript at this stage (desk reject). If deemed appropriate for the journal, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the article to an Associate Editor to manage the review process.

4. Invitation to external reviewers for the first stage To ensure an unbiased evaluation, the assigned editor sends invitations to independent, external experts who are recognized in the relevant field and affiliated with institutions different from the authors'. As responses are received, further invitations are issued if necessary until the required number of reviewers is secured. Typically, this involves two independent blind reviewers, though there may be variations depending on the manuscript's specific topic.

5. Response to invitations for the first stage Invited external reviewers consider the invitation against their expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and availability. They are given 7 days to accept or decline the invitation. When declining, they are encouraged to suggest alternative external reviewers. If a reviewer rejects the invitation, a new external reviewer is immediately assigned by the editor.

6. Under review for the first stage Reviewers who accept the invitation are given 30 days to complete their evaluation. They are provided with a secure system environment and any necessary supplementary materials to assess the article. Upon a reasoned request, reviewers may be granted additional time. At the end of the evaluation period, the external reviewers prepare a detailed, reasoned report and submit their decision (Accept, Revision, or Reject) via the system.

7. Evaluate the reviews for the first stage The editor considers all the returned external review reports before making a decision. Evaluation decisions are numerically coded as follows: Accept (3 points), Revision (2 points), and Reject (1 point).

  • If the average score is below 1.5, the manuscript is rejected and returned to the author.

  • If the average score is between 1.5 and 2.0, a new external reviewer is assigned to break the tie.

  • If the average score is above 2.0, the manuscript is sent back to the author for revision.

  • If the average score is exactly 3.0, the manuscript is accepted and forwarded to production.

8. Revision required for the first stage If the decision is "Revision Required," this is communicated to the author along with the external reviewers’ reports. The author(s) must examine the feedback in detail and make the necessary revisions within 20 days. The author(s) must upload two files to the system: a revised manuscript and a detailed "Revision Report" explaining how each reviewer's comment was addressed. If the author(s) chooses not to make a specific change requested by a reviewer, they must provide a detailed scientific justification for doing so.

9. Response to invitations for the second stage The revised manuscript and the author's response report are sent back to the same external reviewers. If one or more of the original reviewers state they cannot evaluate the revision, a new independent external reviewer is assigned.

10. Under review for the second stage The external reviewers are given 30 days to evaluate the revised manuscript to ensure their concerns have been adequately addressed. Upon a reasoned request, they may be granted additional time. At the end of this period, the reviewers submit a new reasoned report and their updated decision.

11. Evaluate the reviews for the second stage The editor reviews the second-round reports using the same scoring system: Accept (3 points), Revision (2 points), and Reject (1 point).

  • If the average score is below 1.5, the manuscript is rejected.

  • If the average score is between 1.5 and 2.0, a new external reviewer is assigned.

  • If the average score is above 2.0, a subsequent round of revisions is requested.

  • If the average score is 3.0, the manuscript is accepted.

12. Revision required for the third stage If further revisions are still necessary, the author(s) is given another 20 days to make the adjustments. As in the previous stage, the author must upload the newly revised manuscript along with a comprehensive Revision Report addressing the remaining concerns.

13. Response to invitations for the third stage The newly revised manuscript is sent back to the same external reviewers. If any reviewer is unavailable, a new external reviewer is assigned.

14. Under review for the third stage Reviewers are again given 30 days to evaluate the final revisions. They may request extra time if needed. Following the review, they submit their final reasoned report and decision via the system.

15. Evaluate the reviews for the third stage and final decision The editor considers the final external review reports before making a definitive decision. Using the same point system (Accept=3, Revision=2, Reject=1):

  • If the average score is below 2.5, the manuscript is rejected and returned to the author.

  • If the average score is 2.5 or above, the manuscript is officially accepted and sent to production.

16. Production & Online publishing Layout editors format the accepted article according to the journal's publication standards. The formatted article (galley proof) is submitted to the corresponding author for final approval. Once approved by the author, the article is published online and assigned a DOI number.

.