Peer Review Process
CAJLT employs a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and maintain high standards of academic quality.
Upon submission, each manuscript is reviewed for compliance with the journal's scope, originality, formatting, and adherence to the Author Guidelines.
Following submission and once the author’s profile is completed on the journal’s website, an automated email will be sent to confirm receipt of the manuscript and provide information about the next steps in the review process.
If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s formatting or submission requirements, it will be returned to the author for revision and will not proceed to peer review.
Once a manuscript passes the initial screening, the responsible associate editor forwards it to two qualified reviewers selected by the journal’s responsible editor.
Reviewer Selection: Reviewer selection is based on subject matter expertise and academic credentials.
Review Criteria: Reviewers assess the manuscript for:
Originality and significance of the research – relevance to current scholarly discussions and contribution to the field.
Clarity and coherence of arguments – logical organization of the content, conclusions are well supported by data.
Rigor of the methodology – appropriateness, justification, and reliability of the research methods.
Relevance and accuracy of the results – alignment of findings with the research objectives and validity of conclusions.
Contribution to the field of language education – importance and potential impact on foreign language education research.
Reviewer Decision:
Reviewers provide detailed feedback and recommendations, along with one of the following decisions:
Accept – the manuscript meets all requirements and is ready for publication.
Minor revisions required – the manuscript needs small improvements before publication.
Major revisions required – the manuscript requires substantial modifications and must be re-reviewed.
Reject – the manuscript does not meet the journal’s requirements and is unsuitable for publication.
Revision and Resubmission
If revisions are required, authors are given a deadline (typically 2–4 weeks for minor revisions or 4–6 weeks for major revisions) to address the reviewers’ comments. Resubmitted manuscripts must include:
- A revised manuscript.
- A point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments.
- The editorial team may send the revised manuscript back to the reviewers for further evaluation or make a final decision based on the revisions.
Editorial Decision
The editor-in-chief, in consultation with the editorial board, makes the final decision on the manuscript based on: reviewers’ assessment and recommendations; the quality of revisions submitted by the authors in response to the reviewers’ comments; the relevance, originality, and contribution of the research to the journal’s scope.
The possible editorial decisions include:
Accept for publication – The manuscript meets all publication requirements and will proceed to the final production stage.
Request further revisions – The manuscript requires minor or major revisions before reconsideration. Authors will receive detailed feedback outlining the necessary changes.
Reject – The manuscript does not meet the journal’s criteria for publication, either due to methodological weaknesses, lack of originality, or insufficient contribution to the field. Authors will receive detailed feedback and a decision letter at this stage.
Production and Publication
Accepted manuscripts undergo final editing for formatting, grammar, and consistency. Authors will receive a proof for approval before publication. The journal publishes articles online first, followed by inclusion in the next scheduled issue.
