Reviewer Guidelines

A. Before Accepting a Review Invitation

If you have received an invitation to review a manuscript for Vocational: Journal of Educational Technology, please consider the following before accepting:

  • Is the manuscript within your field of expertise?

  • Do you have enough time to complete the review within the expected timeframe (usually three weeks)?

  • Do you have any potential conflicts of interest with the manuscript, the authors, or the institutions involved?

If your answer to any of the above is “yes,” we respectfully ask you to decline the review or discuss the matter with the editor.

B. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide an honest, constructive, and unbiased assessment of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses.

  • Offer specific suggestions for improvement and be respectful in tone.

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the content and status of the manuscript.

  • Avoid making personal comments or judgments about the authors.

  • Not use or share any part of the manuscript before publication.

C. Evaluation Criteria: What to Look For

When evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should consider the following aspects:

  1. Relevance: Is the manuscript appropriate for this journal and its readers?

  2. Originality: Does the work offer new insights or knowledge in its field?

  3. Clarity of Title and Abstract: Are they clear, concise, and reflective of the article’s content?

  4. Introduction: Is the background, problem formulation, and research objective clearly explained?

  5. Methodology: Are the research design and methods appropriate, sound, and well-documented?

  6. Results: Are the findings presented clearly and analyzed properly?

  7. Discussion: Does the discussion interpret the results in light of prior literature and the research objective?

  8. Figures and Tables: Are they necessary, well-labeled, and easy to understand?

  9. References: Are the sources up-to-date, relevant, and cited properly in IEEE Style?

  10. Writing Style and Structure: Is the manuscript well-organized and grammatically correct?

  11. Ethical Compliance: Is the study conducted ethically, and is there any evidence of plagiarism or misconduct?

D. Making a Final Recommendation

At the end of your review, please choose one of the following decisions:

Accept (the paper is publishable in its current form)

Minor Revisions (small improvements needed)

Major Revisions (significant changes required)

Reject (the paper is not suitable for publication)

Please include both:

  • Comments for the author, explaining your decision and offering suggestions for improvement

  • Confidential comments to the editor, if needed (not shared with the author)

E. Appreciation and Acknowledgment

The editorial board highly appreciates the time, effort, and academic contribution of reviewers. Your feedback plays a crucial role in maintaining the academic quality and credibility of this journal.

If you have any questions or concerns during the review process, please contact the editorial team directly via the contact information provided on the journal’s homepage.

Link to this policy:
Reviewer Guidelines Page