Peer Review Process

The VELES journal is committed to ensuring the highest academic integrity and quality standards through a rigorous peer review process. Below is a detailed description of our peer review process:

Submission

1. Initial Submission: Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online system. Manuscripts must adhere to the journal’s guidelines and formatting requirements.

Initial Evaluation

2. Editorial Screening: Upon receipt, the manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the editorial team to ensure it fits the journal’s scope and meets basic quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria are desk-rejected.

Peer Review

3. Reviewer Selection: If the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editor assigns it to two or more independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. The reviewer(s) selection is based on their expertise, reputation, and previous experience reviewing manuscripts.

4. Double-Blind Review: The VELES journal employs a double-blind peer review process, where both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous. This ensures an unbiased and objective review.

5. Review Process: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, methodology, clarity, significance, and relevance to the field. They provide detailed comments and recommendations for the manuscript, including:

   • Acceptance without revisions
   • Minor revisions
   • Major revisions
   • Rejection

Revision

6. Author Revisions: Based on the reviewers' feedback, the authors may be required to revise their manuscript. The revised manuscript should address all the comments and suggestions provided by the reviewers. Authors are expected to submit a detailed response to the reviewers' comments and the revised manuscript.

7. Second Round of Review: The revised manuscript is often sent back to the original reviewers for a second round of evaluation. This process may be repeated until the reviewers are satisfied with the revisions.

Final Decision

8. Editorial Decision: After the peer review process, the editor makes the final decision on the manuscript based on the reviewers' recommendations. The possible outcomes are:

   • Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication.
   • Conditional Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted pending minor revisions.
   • Rejection: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form.

9. Communication to Authors: The editor communicates the final decision and the reviewers' comments to the authors. If accepted, the manuscript moves to the production stage.

Production

10. Proofreading and Typesetting: Accepted manuscripts undergo proofreading and typesetting to prepare them for publication. Authors may be asked to review the proofs for any final corrections.

11. Publication: Once the proofs are approved, the manuscript is published online and in the next available journal issue.

Continuous Improvement

12. Feedback Loop: The VELES journal continuously seeks to improve its peer review process by gathering feedback from authors, reviewers, and editors. This feedback is used to refine the process and ensure the highest academic quality and integrity standards.

By following this rigorous peer review process, the VELES journal aims to maintain the quality and credibility of its research, contributing to advancing knowledge in English language education.