Main Menu
Peer Review
◆ ───── ◇ ───── ◆
Peer Review
Ethnomathica: Journal of Ethnomathematics Studies
Manuscripts submitted to Ethnomathica: Journal of Ethnomathematics Studies undergo a rigorous evaluation process conducted by the Editorial Board and qualified reviewers to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and scholarly contribution of published articles.
All submitted manuscripts initially undergo an editorial screening process to evaluate their suitability with the journal's focus and scope, compliance with author guidelines, originality, and overall academic quality.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal requirements may be returned to authors for revision or rejected without proceeding to the peer review stage.
Peer Review Process
Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening process are reviewed using a double-blind peer review mechanism, where the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.
The manuscripts are evaluated by reviewers with expertise in ethnomathematics, mathematics education, cultural studies, and related interdisciplinary fields.
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate submitted manuscripts based on the following criteria:
1.
Originality and Contribution
The manuscript should provide original insights and meaningful contributions to the development of ethnomathematics research.
The manuscript should provide original insights and meaningful contributions to the development of ethnomathematics research.
2.
Relevance and Scope
The manuscript must align with the focus and scope of Ethnomathica: Journal of Ethnomathematics Studies.
The manuscript must align with the focus and scope of Ethnomathica: Journal of Ethnomathematics Studies.
3.
Theoretical Foundation
The study should demonstrate an appropriate theoretical framework and conceptual foundation supporting the research.
The study should demonstrate an appropriate theoretical framework and conceptual foundation supporting the research.
4.
Research Methodology
The research design, data collection procedures, and analytical approaches should be appropriate and scientifically justified.
The research design, data collection procedures, and analytical approaches should be appropriate and scientifically justified.
5.
Academic Presentation
The manuscript should demonstrate clarity, coherence, academic writing quality, and proper organization.
The manuscript should demonstrate clarity, coherence, academic writing quality, and proper organization.
Reviewer Decision
Based on the evaluation results, reviewers provide recommendations regarding the manuscript status:
1.
Accepted
The manuscript is considered suitable for publication without further revision.
The manuscript is considered suitable for publication without further revision.
2.
Accepted with Minor Revisions
The manuscript requires limited revisions before publication.
The manuscript requires limited revisions before publication.
3.
Accepted with Major Revisions
The manuscript requires substantial revisions related to theoretical, methodological, analytical, or structural aspects.
The manuscript requires substantial revisions related to theoretical, methodological, analytical, or structural aspects.
4.
Rejected
The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to significant issues related to quality, originality, relevance, or methodology.
The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to significant issues related to quality, originality, relevance, or methodology.
Final Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance is determined by the Editorial Board based on reviewers' recommendations and editorial considerations. Authors are required to address reviewer comments and complete necessary revisions before the final publication decision is made.
◆ ETHNOMATHICA ◆
