Peer Review Process
Higher Education Politics & Economics uses double-blind review process, which means that both the reviewer and author name(s) are not allowed to be revealed to one another for a manuscript under review. Manuscripts are assigned to two or more reviewers. Reviewers provide a complete, fair, thoughtful evaluation of manuscripts to ensure all published work meet the goals of the journal.
Reviewers are asked to consider the following criteria:
- Significance Does the manuscript represent a new and demonstratively significant advancement in research on international students?
- Review of Literature: Does the manuscript include a well-organized and analytical review of relevant literature? Does the manuscript use a clear and well-developed theoretical/conceptual framework?
- Research Design: Does the manuscript reflect appropriate design and methodology? Does the manuscript reflect high quality data and analysis?
- Discussion: Does the discussion and conclusion highlight the relevance of the findings for research, policy, and practice?
- Style: Is the manuscript clear, logical, and concise? Does the manuscript follow APA publication guidelines?
Based on the feedback from the reviewers, the Editors will make one of the following decisions:
- Decline Submission: The manuscript is unsuitable for publication in the journal.
- Resubmit for Review (major revisions): The manuscript has potential for publication but significant revisions are required before publication can be considered.
- Revisions Required (minor revisions): The manuscript has potential for publication but specific revisions should be made before publication can be considered.
- Accept Submission: The manuscript can proceed to the next stage of the editorial process without any further edits.
If a manuscript is accepted for publication, all authors are required to complete Terms of Agreement. By signing these terms of agreement, authors release all copyrights to Higher Education Politics & Economics.