The Proceedings Journal of Education, Psychology and Social Science Research utilize a double-blind peer-review process in determining acceptability in presentation and publication.
1. Authors submit the abstract of his/her paper to the conference secretariat.
2. The secretariat will review its format following the template prescribed by the conference committee.
3. The secretariat will assign a unique tag number for each abstract. This tag number will be used to trace the abstract and referencing purposes.
4. It will then be sent to the conference chair for evaluation or the chairperson on an invited paper session.
5. The evaluation covers the following criteria: (a) Consistency of the title to the discussion in the abstract; (b) Existence of methodology used, or data gathering procedure (c) Relevance of the result of the study to the cluster field of study.
6. If the abstract garnered a majority affirmation based on the above criteria, as evaluated by the chair or invited paper chairperson, the secretariat will issue a notice of acceptance to the Author.
7. At this point, the paper is Accepted for Presentation in the conference.
For publication in the proceedings journal, the following process will be undertaken:
1. Authors submit a full paper through the conference. A full paper is composed of at least 6 pages and maximum of 8 pages, including tables and figures.
2. Upon receipt of the secretariat of the full paper, a unique tag number will be assigned to the paper. It will be used to trace the paper and referencing purposes.
3. It will be sent to at least two (2) peer-reviewers identified by the committee chair or from the pool of reviewers listed in the roster of the organizers. Reviewers, who are authorities in their selected fields, provides comments and suggestion and assist the Editor-in-chief in arriving at a suggestion to fit the aims and scope of the proceedings. If the manuscript lacks substantial requisite for inclusion in the proceedeings, the Editor-in-chief will be asked to include the accepted abstract only.
4. To help decide on the fitness of the paper and reach a common conclusion on the paper’s suitability for publication, the Editor-in-chief usually asks for an editorial board gathering to study the peer-reviewers comments.
5. The authors may be asked to respond to the questions raised by reviewers.
6. The author/s are to respond in due time and clarify ambiguities if any.
7. Upon receiving the revised paper, the editors will review the edited paper and check for the author’s compliance to the comments and suggestions of the reviewers.
8. Upon the last round of review (mentioned at 7), and their approval, the paper is put in the queue for publication.
Referees will evaluate the abstract of the manuscript from the following criteria:
1. The overall purpose of the study or the research problem(s) being investigated is clearly presented.
2. The basic research design of the study is mentioned in the abstract.
3. The major findings or trends found as a result of the authors’ analysis are stated, well presented and substantially discussed.
4. A brief summary of interpretations and conclusions is presented.
5. Overall, is the abstract presents an ACCEPTABLE research findings significant to be presented in the conference?
Referees will evaluate the full paper version of the manuscript from the following criteria:
2. Compliance to publication ethics
3. Cogruence and organization
4. Appropriate referencing
Review Time frame
For presentation acceptance, review process will not exceed 2 weeks.
Fore publication acceptance, review process will not exceed 2 months. However publication and availability online may run for about 6 months after the conference presentation.
Notice of Acceptance
The authors will receive the Notice of Acceptance from the conference secretariat for presentaiton in the conference within 2 weeks from the paper submission if the submitted article or abstract is accepted. The notice of acceptance will be sent to the authors directly.