Editorial Policies

The Journal of Studies in Teaching Practice and Educational Innovation (REPDIE) conducts its editorial process according to criteria of academic quality, impartiality, confidentiality, transparency, and adherence to good practices in scholarly publishing. All manuscripts received undergo an initial editorial review and, when they meet the journal’s formal, thematic, and ethical requirements, proceed to double-blind academic peer review.

Submission of a manuscript does not imply a commitment to publication. The final decision rests with the editorial team and is based on the academic reviewers’ reports, compliance with the journal’s editorial guidelines, and the authors’ response to the observations made during the review process.

 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts considered eligible for academic publication in the Journal of Studies in Teaching Practice and Educational Innovation (REPDIE) undergo double-blind peer review, so that authors and reviewers remain unaware of each other’s identities throughout the entire review process.

Each manuscript is evaluated by two specialists external to REPDIE’s publishing institution, Teacher Normal School No. 1 of Toluca, selected on the basis of their academic expertise, professional trajectory, and knowledge of the manuscript’s subject area.

Reviewers must have no academic, professional, institutional, financial, or personal conflicts of interest that could compromise the independence and impartiality of their assessment. Peer reviewers are selected by the editorial team, with particular attention to ensuring that their area of expertise is appropriate to the content of the manuscript.

The process comprises the following stages:

Initial editorial review. The editorial team verifies that the manuscript falls within the journal’s focus and scope, complies with the author guidelines, contains the required academic components, and meets basic standards of originality and publication ethics. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors before external review begins.

Originality and similarity screening. Before being sent for peer review, the manuscript undergoes similarity-detection procedures and editorial examination of potential textual overlap.

Assignment of peer reviewers. Manuscripts that pass the initial review are sent to two external specialists for evaluation under the double-blind review model.

Academic assessment. Depending on the nature of the manuscript, reviewers assess aspects such as thematic relevance, originality, theoretical grounding, methodological and argumentative consistency, clarity of presentation, quality of the results or contributions, currency and relevance of the sources, and contribution to the field of education.

Communication of results. The editorial team consolidates the reviewers’ reports and communicates the corresponding decision to the authors, together with the reviewers’ comments when applicable.

Revision by the authors. When revisions are requested, authors must submit a new version of the manuscript and, when appropriate, a reasoned response to the comments received.

Verification and editorial decision. The editorial team verifies whether the reviewers’ observations have been adequately addressed and determines whether the manuscript may proceed to the editing stage or requires further evaluation.

Editing and publication. Accepted manuscripts proceed through copyediting, standardization, layout, proof review, assignment or validation of identifiers, and publication.

 

Externality and Independence of Reviewers

REPDIE guarantees the participation of reviewers external to the publishing institution in all peer-review processes. Accordingly, individuals affiliated with Teacher Training College No. 1 of Toluca do not serve as reviewers for manuscripts submitted for peer evaluation. Likewise, the journal avoids assigning reviewers who may have potential conflicts of interest with the authors, their affiliated institutions, or the content of the manuscript.

 

Possible Review Outcomes

Reviewers may recommend one of the following outcomes:

Accepted without revisions.
Accepted with minor revisions.
Subject to major revisions and further review.
Not accepted for publication.

Peer reviewers’ recommendations constitute a fundamental element of the editorial decision but do not, by themselves, imply automatic acceptance of the manuscript.

 

Conflicting Reviews and Third Evaluation

When the two reviewers’ reports present substantial differences, for example, when one recommends acceptance and the other rejection, the manuscript will be sent to a third external reviewer.

The third review will serve as an additional element for the editorial team in determining the outcome of the process. The final decision will be based on the full set of academic assessments and REPDIE’s editorial criteria.

 

Disputes and Conflicts of Interest

Authors may request clarification regarding the review process when they believe that a procedural error has occurred or that a situation may have compromised the impartiality of the assessment. Such requests must be supported by academic grounds and will be reviewed by the editorial team.

When a member of the editorial team has an academic, institutional, professional, or personal relationship that may constitute a conflict of interest with respect to a manuscript, that person will refrain from participating in its evaluation and editorial decision.

The identity of reviewers will remain confidential.

 

Editorial Process Timeframes

REPDIE seeks to conduct the review process in a timely manner while maintaining academic rigor. In general, the following timeframes apply:

Initial editorial review: up to 10 business days.

Peer review: approximately 3 to 5 weeks.

Revisions by authors: 10 to 20 business days, depending on the nature of the requested changes.

Second review or editorial verification: approximately 1 to 3 weeks.

These timeframes are estimates and may vary depending on the complexity of the manuscript, the availability of specialists, and the need for additional rounds of review.

 

Review Form

Reviewers receive an academic review form designed to guide the systematic assessment of the manuscript. Depending on the type of contribution, the instrument considers: relevance to the journal’s focus and scope; originality and significance of the contribution; clarity of the objective; theoretical grounding; methodological consistency; analysis and discussion; argumentative coherence; relevance and currency of references; clarity of academic writing; compliance with ethical principles; and an overall assessment of the manuscript.

The form includes sections for comments addressed to the authors and, when appropriate, confidential comments for the editorial team.

 

Editorial Ethics and Good Practices

REPDIE is committed to academic integrity and good practices in scholarly publishing. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to act with honesty, responsibility, confidentiality, impartiality, and respect for intellectual property.

The journal is guided by widely recognized principles of publication ethics, including those promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), without this necessarily implying institutional membership in that organization.

Practices such as fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, misappropriation of ideas, manipulation of results, redundant publication, simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to different journals, unjustified attribution of authorship, or deliberate omission of individuals who have made substantial contributions will not be accepted.

All individuals listed as authors of a manuscript must have made a significant academic contribution to the work and assume responsibility for its content.

Authors must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, or personal conflict of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation.

When significant errors, irregularities, or potential breaches of academic integrity are identified after publication, REPDIE may conduct the corresponding editorial investigations and, as appropriate, publish corrections, errata notices, expressions of concern, or retractions, while seeking to preserve the traceability and transparency of the scholarly record.

 

Similarity Detection and Plagiarism Prevention Policy

All manuscripts received by REPDIE undergo originality screening procedures prior to publication.

The journal uses Turnitin © as a supporting tool to identify textual similarities with previously published documents and other available sources.

Automatically generated similarity percentages do not, by themselves, constitute a determination of plagiarism. Results are reviewed qualitatively by the editorial team, taking into account the nature of the similarities, the proper use of citations and references, the presence of commonly used technical expressions, and the specific characteristics of each manuscript.

When significant similarities, failure to attribute sources, unjustified reuse of one’s own or others’ texts, or other potential irregularities are identified, the manuscript may be returned for correction, rejected, or subjected to further ethical review.

When an irregularity is identified after publication, REPDIE will apply the corresponding editorial procedures for correction or retraction.

 

Copyright and Publication License

Authors retain copyright over their works and authorize REPDIE to publish and disseminate them electronically for the first time.

Content published by the journal is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).

This license permits the sharing and adaptation of content provided that appropriate credit is given to the author and original source, the use is non-commercial, and derivative works are distributed under the same license.

Publication in REPDIE does not entail the exclusive transfer of economic rights to the journal. Authors may subsequently disseminate their works, provided that the original publication in REPDIE is appropriately acknowledged and the conditions established by the license are maintained.

 

Self-Archiving Policy

REPDIE permits and promotes the self-archiving of published works as part of its commitment to open access to knowledge.

Authors may deposit and disseminate the published version of their works in institutional or subject repositories, academic websites, personal profiles, and other scholarly dissemination platforms, without an embargo period, provided that the original publication is properly cited, the corresponding DOI is included, and the terms of the Creative Commons license used by the journal are respected.

Authors are encouraged to use the final version published by REPDIE and to retain the complete bibliographic information of the contribution.

 

Digital Preservation Policy

REPDIE undertakes actions aimed at ensuring the long-term preservation, availability, and retrieval of its digital content.

Articles, metadata, and files associated with the journal are managed through Open Journal Systems (OJS). The journal maintains backup and preservation mechanisms designed to reduce the risk of information loss and ensure the continuity of its editorial archive.

In addition, REPDIE’s metadata are available through the OAI-PMH protocol, facilitating interoperability, harvesting, and retrieval by external services.