Review Process

◆ Peer Review Process

Praefectura: Journal of Transformational Leadership and Educational Management is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, independent, and efficient peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and scholarly contribution of every manuscript considered for publication.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo editorial evaluation and peer review before a final publication decision is made.

Peer Review Principles

Praefectura applies a double-blind peer-review process. The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

Authors are therefore expected to remove identifying information from manuscripts submitted for peer review where required to preserve the integrity and anonymity of the review process.

Each submitted manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to determine its relevance to the journal's scope and focus, compliance with the Author Guidelines and submission requirements, originality, ethical standards, and overall academic quality.

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic editorial requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or declined before entering the peer-review process.

Prior to peer review, manuscripts may undergo similarity screening using appropriate plagiarism-detection or similarity-checking tools. The journal applies a maximum similarity threshold of 25%.

A similarity score alone does not automatically determine whether plagiarism has occurred. The editorial team evaluates the nature, extent, source, and context of overlapping material in accordance with the journal's publication ethics and ethical publication principles.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are normally reviewed by at least two suitably qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area of the submitted manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, subject expertise, and ability to provide an independent, objective, and constructive assessment.

Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts based on their academic quality and scholarly contribution, including:

• Originality and novelty of the research;
• Relevance to the journal's scope and focus;
• Theoretical and practical contribution;
• Methodological rigor and research design;
• Quality and clarity of analysis;
• Validity of findings and conclusions;
• Quality and relevance of references; and
• Overall scholarly merit and contribution to knowledge.

Based on the reviewers' reports and the editorial evaluation, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding the manuscript.

Possible editorial decisions include:

• Accept Submission
• Revisions Required
• Resubmit for Review
• Decline Submission

Authors whose manuscripts require revision are expected to revise their work in response to the comments and recommendations provided by reviewers and editors.

Depending on the extent of the revision, the revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation or assessed directly by the editorial team.

A manuscript is accepted for publication only after successfully completing the required editorial and peer-review process and meeting the journal's standards for academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution.

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief.