Evaluation Policy

The peer review process is double-blind. Its main objective is to ensure the quality and scientific integrity of the publications. As a reviewer, your critical analysis is essential for:

  • Support the editorial decision regarding the publication of the manuscript.

  • Contribute to the improvement of the text by identifying strengths and aspects that need development or correction.

  • Ensure theoretical and methodological robustness, clarity in the presentation of results, and the relevance of discussions and conclusions for the field of Education and Languages.

Academic Integrity and Conflicts of Interest

  • Confidentiality: This is a double-blind peer review process. The identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential. The manuscript under review is for exclusive use in this process and must not be shared or discussed with third parties.

  • Conflict of Interest: You must decline the invitation if you identify any conflict of interest of a personal, professional, or financial nature with the authors or the content of the manuscript. Questions about a potential conflict can be clarified with the Editorial Team.

Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

In your assessment, please consider the following aspects to provide a well-founded review:

  • Does the topic fall within the scope of the Journal of Education and Languages?
  • Is the research topic relevant and worthy of investigation?
  • Does the article present original content?
  • Does the title accurately reflect the content of the text?
  • Does the abstract comply with journal guidelines and adequately present all necessary elements?
  • Are the keywords appropriate?
  • Is the presentation, organization, and length of the text appropriate for its objectives?
  • Does the introduction clearly state the objectives and provide a brief contextualization?
  • Is the discussion relevant, sufficient, and appropriate? Is it well-articulated with the literature review?
  • Do the data/corpus presented justify the interpretations/discussions?
  • Are there any theoretical or methodological inconsistencies?
  • Are there sections that require additions or complementary information?
  • Are there sections that need to be reduced or condensed?
  • Are any illustrations, tables, charts, or graphs necessary and appropriately used?
  • Are the references appropriate, relevant, and sufficient to support the discussion and topic? Are they formatted according to journal guidelines?
  • Are all authors cited in the text included in the reference list?
  • Is the writing quality satisfactory in terms of language norms and grammar, using the standard written variety of Portuguese? Does it meet academic-scientific writing standards for publication?

Practical Guidelines for Review Reports

For an effective evaluation, we recommend:

  1. Complete the Official Form:Use the Reviewer Assessment Form available in the OJS system, which structures your analysis based on the journal's criteria.

  2. Be Constructive and Specific: In the form and text comments, justify all your observations. Instead of stating "the methodology is weak," explain why it is weak and suggest improvements.

  3. Comments in the Text: It is highly recommended to include comments and suggestions directly in the manuscript file (using the comment tool), pointing to specific passages. This streamlines the revision process for the authors.

  4. Maintain Respect and Impartiality: Criticism should always be directed at the content of the work, never at its authors. The Editorial Team reserves the right to edit or remove language deemed inappropriate or offensive.

  5. Meet the Deadlines: Submission within the stipulated deadline is crucial for the timeliness of the process. In case of unforeseen circumstances, please notify the Editorial Team as soon as possible.

If you have questions at any stage of the process, do not hesitate to contact the Editorial Team.