Become a Reviewer

Appointment based on expertise and independence

Admission to the reviewer pool is a verifiable eligibility decision, not a guarantee of assignments.

Entry into the reviewer database recognizes assessment capacity, not board membership or employment. Education, publications, subject and methodological experience, integrity, languages, and availability are considered.

Geographic, institutional, disciplinary, and career diversity strengthens review but does not replace expertise. The journal avoids dependence on a closed group and monitors endogamy and conflicts.

Profile

Applicants should have postgraduate training, demonstrated experience in education or disciplines connected to higher education research problems, recent publications, and methodological competence.

Application

Interested reviewers register in OJS and provide affiliation, ORCID, areas of expertise, keywords, methodological experience, languages, and relevant publications. Registration does not guarantee assignments.

Commitments

Accept only manuscripts relevant to their expertise.

Meet deadlines or promptly report constraints.

Disclose conflicts of interest.

Maintain confidentiality and avoid external AI use with the manuscript.

Provide reasoned, respectful, and useful reports.

Keep their profile current.

Selection

The editor verifies expertise, institutional diversity, and absence of conflicts. Previous performance, timeliness, and report quality inform future invitations.

Eligibility requirements

Postgraduate education is considered alongside recent, verifiable experience in educational research or a relevant method. Applicants must be able to interpret the study type, write clear comments, and read the manuscript language. Affiliation alone does not establish competence.

The journal promotes institutional, geographic, disciplinary, and career-stage diversity without lowering scientific standards. Early-career researchers may participate when sufficiently experienced or through authorized mentoring that preserves confidentiality and accountability.

Onboarding and assignments

Applications are reviewed before a person enters the database. ORCID, publications, topics, methods, and possible conflicts are checked. Inclusion is not employment, editorial-board membership, or a promise of a minimum number of manuscripts.

Each invitation is based on fit between profile and manuscript. Reviewers may accept or decline without penalty and should update availability. Manuscripts are not assigned as rewards, reciprocal favors, or conditions for publication.

Performance assessment

Editors assess timeliness, depth, reasoning, respect, problem detection, and usefulness. Reviewers may receive feedback and certificates, but identities and confidential content are not disclosed. Public recognition requires consent and does not link names to individual manuscripts.

A profile may be suspended or updated because of superficial reports, repeated delays, offensive language, hidden conflicts, confidentiality breaches, or improper citation demands. Removal protects the process and does not constitute a public allegation.

Inviting and accepting reviews

Register a complete profile, ORCID, affiliation, topics, methods, languages, and publications.

Verify identity and experience before activating the profile.

Update availability and areas of competence.

Accept only suitable invitations and disclose conflicts.

Meet the deadline, confidentiality, independence, and report guidelines.

Participate in orientation or feedback when offered.

Information on expertise and conflicts

A verified OJS profile and update date.

Records of invitations, acceptance, delivery, and quality.

Conflict and confidentiality declarations.

Orientation records and measures for noncompliance.

Maintaining the reviewer pool

The editor reviews performance and may pause assignments for repeated delay, deficient reports, misconduct, or confidentiality breaches. Reactivation requires profile updates or corrective action; it is not used to punish a well-supported critical recommendation.

Building a specialist reviewer pool

Expertise records distinguish the seven research areas and methods including experimental and quasi-experimental studies, qualitative analysis, mixed methods, policy evaluation, educational measurement, curriculum research, learning analytics and evidence synthesis. Editors verify identity, publications and experience rather than assuming rank alone predicts review quality.

Invitations to staff from the university under study, thesis supervisors or project partners require conflict checking before file access. Continued reviewer eligibility depends on confidentiality, timeliness, report quality and absence of coercive behavior.

Selection based on demonstrable competence

Invitations are based on publications, research fields, methodological expertise and capacity to judge the problem rather than academic rank or affiliation alone. Studies on learning analytics, student well-being, accreditation or doctoral education are assigned to reviewers with suitable methods and context expertise. Editors verify identity and affiliation from independent sources when an account or email raises reasonable concern.

Performance and continued eligibility

Registration as a reviewer does not guarantee assignments or imply editorial-board membership. Timeliness, reasoned analysis, confidentiality, respectful language and freedom from coercive citations are monitored. Repeated inadequate reports, concealed conflicts or impersonation may lead to suspension of invitations and, where warranted, an ethics investigation.