Review Guidelines

Journal of Teaching and Learning in Early Childhood Education (JELITA) expects reviewers to conduct manuscript evaluations objectively, professionally, and constructively. Reviewers should provide clear feedback that can assist the authors in improving the quality of their manuscripts and help the editor make an informed editorial decision.

1. General Guidelines

Reviewers should:

  1. Read the entire manuscript carefully before completing the review.

  2. Evaluate the manuscript objectively and independently.

  3. Assess the manuscript based on its academic quality, relevance, originality, and contribution to early childhood education.

  4. Provide constructive comments that are clear, specific, and supported by appropriate academic reasoning.

  5. Maintain confidentiality regarding the manuscript and the review process.

  6. Avoid personal, offensive, discriminatory, or irrelevant comments.

  7. Declare any potential conflict of interest to the editor before accepting or completing the review.

2. Review Criteria

Reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects:

A. Relevance and Contribution

  • Is the manuscript relevant to the focus and scope of JELITA?

  • Does the manuscript provide a meaningful contribution to early childhood education?

  • Does the study address a relevant academic or practical issue?

B. Title and Abstract

  • Is the title clear, concise, and representative of the manuscript?

  • Does the abstract accurately describe the purpose, methods, main findings, and conclusions?

  • Are the keywords relevant to the manuscript?

C. Introduction

  • Is the research background clearly presented?

  • Is the research problem or purpose clearly stated?

  • Is the study supported by relevant literature?

  • Is the research gap or rationale adequately explained?

D. Methodology

Where applicable, reviewers should assess:

  • The appropriateness of the research design.

  • The clarity of the research procedures.

  • The suitability of participants, data sources, instruments, or materials.

  • The appropriateness of data collection and analysis procedures.

  • The consideration of relevant ethical requirements.

E. Results and Discussion

  • Are the results presented clearly and logically?

  • Are the findings supported by the data?

  • Is the discussion related to the research objectives and relevant literature?

  • Does the manuscript explain the significance of the findings appropriately?

F. Conclusion

  • Does the conclusion reflect the main findings of the study?

  • Is it consistent with the research objectives and results?

  • Does the manuscript provide relevant implications or recommendations where appropriate?

G. References

  • Are the references relevant and appropriate?

  • Are important sources properly cited?

  • Are citations and references presented consistently?

  • Are sources adequately acknowledged?

H. Language and Presentation

  • Is the manuscript written in clear and appropriate academic language?

  • Is the manuscript logically organized?

  • Are tables, figures, and other supporting materials presented clearly and appropriately?

3. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should inform the editor if they identify potential concerns related to:

  1. Plagiarism or substantial similarity with other publications.

  2. Duplicate or simultaneous submission.

  3. Fabrication or falsification of research data.

  4. Inappropriate or disputed authorship.

  5. Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

  6. Other forms of academic or publication misconduct.

Reviewers should not make accusations directly to the authors. Any ethical concern should be communicated confidentially to the editor.

4. Reviewer Recommendation

After completing the evaluation, reviewers should provide a recommendation to the editor based on the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript.

Possible recommendations include:

  • Accept — The manuscript is suitable for publication with no or only very minor revisions.

  • Minor Revision — The manuscript requires limited revisions before it can be considered for publication.

  • Major Revision — The manuscript requires substantial revisions and further evaluation.

  • Reject — The manuscript does not meet the academic, ethical, or scope requirements of the journal.

The final editorial decision is the responsibility of the editorial team.

5. Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. Manuscripts and information obtained during the review process should not be shared, copied, discussed, or used for personal or professional purposes without authorization from the editorial team.

JELITA appreciates reviewers' contributions and expects all reviews to be conducted with integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and respect for the authors and the scholarly publication process.