Ihlara Journal of Educational Research applies the double-blind reviewing method. The blind review method aims to ensure that scientific studies are evaluated objectively and that the quality of the research is kept at the highest level. Our referees play a critical role in maintaining the publication standards of our journal. For this reason, all articles published in our journal undergo anonymous peer review. Two independent expert reviewers usually conduct peer reviews.

Type of Peer Review

Ihlara Journal of Educational Research (IHEAD) uses "double-blind" refereeing in which the referees are anonymous to the author(s), and the identity of the author(s) is anonymous to the referees during and after the refereeing process.

Articles submitted to the Ihlara Journal of Educational Research (IHEAD) are first evaluated through a pre-control process. Submitted articles are examined for compliance with the template, anonymity, Ethics Committee Approval (with the reason), iThenticate Report (maximum 15%; excluding block citations and references), Handover Form and Title Pages.

The editorial board evaluates articles whose preliminary control procedures are completed and deemed appropriate. In this process, the candidate article is examined in terms of scientific originality, scientific critical errors, language and expression used, suitability for the purpose and scope of the journal, etc. Candidate articles that are found unsuitable as a result of the evaluation are returned with the necessary explanation. The field editor assigns the potential articles to the relevant referees within the scope of the research content and the referees' areas of expertise. The field editor proposes at least two referees for the candidate articles. The field editor who makes a referee suggestion submits the referee suggestion to the editor. The candidate article approved by the editor is sent to the referees.

Referee Reports

The referees evaluate the reports in terms of scientific originality, soundness in the methodology used, findings, conclusion and discussion, correct and comprehensive references to related studies, compliance with plagiarism and other ethical rules, etc.

In case of inconsistencies in the referee reports or unreasonable delays in the referee reports, expert opinion may be obtained from an expert other than the two referees.

At the end of the evaluation, the referee reports, including the journal editor's decision and the referees' recommendations and comments, are prepared and sent to the relevant author(s). After this stage, the candidate article is sent to the referees for the necessary checks. In this process, referees may ask the author(s) to do multiple revisions.

Final Decision

The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript is sent to the author(s) in a report, together with the referees' recommendations and comments, if any. The referees advise the Editor-in-Chief, who is responsible for the final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.