Peer Review Process

Review Policy & Standards

Novela Journal of English Education, Technology and Innovation (NEETI) implements a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure scientific integrity, objectivity, originality, and academic quality. Under this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the evaluation process. Each submitted manuscript is evaluated based on its originality, theoretical foundation, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, clarity of presentation, quality of analysis, and contribution to the fields of English education, English language teaching, educational technology, language pedagogy, assessment, digital learning, and innovation.

Step-by-Step Peer Review Workflow

All submitted manuscripts undergo a structured multi-stage evaluation process as outlined below:

1. Initial Desk Screening & Plagiarism Check

Upon submission, the Managing Editor conducts an initial desk screening to verify the manuscript's alignment with the journal's focus and scope, compliance with the Author Guidelines, manuscript structure, and completeness. Manuscripts are also screened for plagiarism using an appropriate similarity-checking system.

2. Assignment of Handling Editor

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to an Associate Editor or Section Editor with relevant expertise. The Handling Editor identifies and invites at least two (2) independent expert reviewers whose expertise is relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review Evaluation

Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript according to the journal's review criteria. The evaluation considers the clarity of the research problem, theoretical foundation, research methodology, quality of data and analysis, discussion of findings, relevance of references, originality, and contribution to English education, English language teaching, educational technology, language pedagogy, assessment, digital learning, or educational innovation.

Reviewers provide one of the following official recommendations:

Accept Submission: The manuscript meets the journal's academic and editorial standards and is suitable for publication.
Revisions Required: The manuscript requires minor revisions before it can proceed toward publication.
Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and must undergo another round of peer review.
Decline Submission: The manuscript does not meet the required standards of originality, methodological quality, academic contribution, or relevance to the journal's scope.

4. Editorial Decision

The Handling Editor evaluates the reviewers' reports and recommendations and makes the formal editorial decision. The decision is communicated electronically to the corresponding author together with constructive feedback and revision instructions, where applicable.

5. Revision & Re-Evaluation

If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript together with a point-by-point Response to Reviewers document addressing all reviewer comments and recommendations within the specified deadline. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

6. Final Approval & Production

Once a manuscript is accepted, it proceeds to the production stage, including copyediting, layout formatting, DOI assignment where applicable, final proofreading, and preparation for official online publication under Open Access terms.

Review Timeline Summary

• Initial Desk Decision: 3–7 days after submission.
• First Peer Review Decision: 2–4 weeks.
• Revision Window: 2–3 weeks.
• Publication Lead Time: 1–2 weeks after acceptance.

NEETI is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, transparency, fairness, and confidentiality throughout the peer review process. Editors and reviewers are expected to conduct their responsibilities objectively and in accordance with internationally recognized publication ethics principles, including relevant COPE guidelines.