Peer Review Policy

The journal International Scientific Pedagogical Research (ISPR), published by American Irfano Global Academy LLC, implements a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic quality, integrity, and scientific validity.
The peer review system is designed to provide an objective and fair evaluation of all submitted manuscripts, ensuring that publication decisions are based solely on scholarly merit.
1. Review Model
All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process, in which:
Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
This system ensures impartiality, minimizes bias, and guarantees an independent evaluation of academic work.
2. Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the editorial board to determine:
relevance to the journal scope
compliance with formatting and ethical standards
originality and basic academic quality
Manuscripts that do not meet basic requirements may be rejected without external review.
3. Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject-area expertise.
Reviewers are selected based on:
academic qualifications
research experience
subject specialization
absence of conflict of interest
4. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
originality and novelty of research
methodological rigor and validity
clarity of presentation and structure
contribution to the field of study
relevance to the journal scope
proper use of references and academic sources
5. Review Outcomes
Based on reviewers’ reports, the editorial decision will be one of the following:
Accept
Minor Revisions
Major Revisions
Reject
Authors may be requested to revise and resubmit their manuscripts based on reviewer feedback.
6. Confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts are treated as strictly confidential.
Editors and reviewers must not disclose any information about the manuscript.
Unpublished content must not be used for personal research or advantage.
7. Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must decline to review any manuscript where a conflict of interest exists, including:
personal or professional relationships with authors
financial or institutional affiliations
competitive research interests
8. Timeliness
The journal is committed to an efficient peer review process.
Initial review decision is typically provided within a reasonable timeframe.
Reviewers are expected to submit timely and constructive reports.
9. Editorial Independence
Final publication decisions are made solely by the editorial board based on:
reviewers’ recommendations
scientific merit
ethical compliance
journal scope relevance
Editors retain full independence in decision-making.
10. Ethical Standards in Review
Peer review must be conducted ethically and professionally.
Reviews must be objective and constructive
Personal criticism is not allowed
Reviewers must support feedback with academic reasoning