Review Guidelines

To ensure high-quality academic contributions, submitted manuscripts will be assessed based on the following criteria:

1. Presentation

  • Does the manuscript present a cohesive and logically structured argument?

  • Are the ideas clearly articulated and easy to follow for the reader?

2. Writing Quality

  • Does the title accurately reflect the content and scope of the manuscript?

  • Is the writing concise, coherent, and accessible to an international academic audience?

3. Length and Structure

  • Are there sections that should be expanded, condensed, removed, summarized, or combined for better clarity and flow?

  • Is the overall length appropriate to the complexity and depth of the study?

4. Title

  • Is the title concise and free of redundant or implicit terms?

  • Does it reflect the main outcome or conclusion of the study?

  • Are abbreviations avoided in the title?

5. Abstract

Does the abstract clearly include:

  1. The aim or purpose of the study?

  2. The method or approach used?

  3. The main results or findings?

  4. The conclusion or implications?

6. Introduction

Does the introduction clearly outline:

  • The background and context of the study?

  • A review of relevant literature to position the work within current research (state of the art)?

  • A clear gap analysis and novelty statement?

  • An optional hypothesis or problem statement?

  • The approach taken to resolve the identified problem?

  • The objective or aim of the research?

7. Methodology

  • Is the methodology described in enough detail to allow replication by other researchers?

  • Does it include the research location, participants, instruments, and data analysis techniques?

  • Does it go beyond definitions and clearly explain the research process?

8. Results and Discussion

  • Are the data processed and presented clearly, in tables or figures with supporting descriptions?

  • Are the results aligned with the research questions or objectives stated earlier?

  • Is there a comparison with existing literature, noting similarities or differences?

  • Are the findings interpreted scientifically and logically?

  • Are the implications of the research clearly stated?

  • Are limitations or methodological weaknesses acknowledged?

  • Are suggestions for future research or development of ideas provided?

9. Conclusion

  • Does the conclusion clearly respond to the research objectives?

  • Are implications or recommendations included (if applicable)?

  • Is the conclusion presented in a single paragraph format (not bulleted or numbered)?

This rubric is designed to guide both reviewers and authors in ensuring that each submission to Gifted: Journal of Early Childhood Education meets the journal’s standards for academic rigor, clarity, and impact.