Review Policy

JDIME: Journal of Development and Innovation in Mathematics Education is committed to maintaining the highest standards of peer review and publication integrity. To ensure the quality and credibility of published works, JDIME implements a double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process to maintain objectivity and fairness.

1. Initial Manuscript Screening

All submissions are first evaluated by the editorial team to assess their alignment with the aims and scope of JDIME, adherence to author guidelines, originality, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria or show signs of ethical misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, redundancy) will be desk-rejected without external review.

2. Peer Review Process

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to at least two expert reviewers (Double Blind Review System) in the field of mathematics education where the reviewers are not aware of the names and affiliations of the authors and the reviewer reports provided to authors are anonymous. Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research background, and familiarity with the topic of the manuscript.

The review process involves:

• An evaluation of the manuscript’s originality, clarity, relevance, theoretical contribution, research design, and validity of results.
• Constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement.
• A recommendation to Accept, Revise (Minor or Major), or Reject the manuscript.

3. Review Timeline

Reviewers are expected to provide their reports within 2 to 4 weeks of accepting the invitation to review. Authors will typically receive the editorial decision within 4 to 6 weeks after submission, depending on the responsiveness of reviewers.

4. Revision Process

If revisions are requested, authors must resubmit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks for minor revisions or 4 weeks for major revisions, accompanied by a point-by-point response letter explaining how each reviewer comment was addressed.

Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation, particularly in cases of major revision.

5. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, considering reviewers’ comments, author responses, and overall manuscript quality. Decisions are classified as:

• Accept – the manuscript is accepted for publication.
• Minor Revision – minor changes are required before acceptance.
• Major Revision – significant improvements are required.
• Reject – the manuscript is not suitable for publication in JDIME.

6. Confidentiality and Ethics

All submitted manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and decline to review if any such conflicts exist. JDIME upholds COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and expects all participants to adhere to ethical standards throughout the review process.

7. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed justification to the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals will be evaluated carefully, and a final decision will be communicated after an internal review or additional peer review if necessary.