SUBMISSION

PJLPEL employs both Malay and English as the official languages for all content on the journal’s website.

PJLPEL is published twice a year (April/May and August/September) and is open access.

Reciprocal Contribution in the Peer Review Process

Peer reviewing journal manuscripts is an important professional practice that makes a significant contribution to the advancement of knowledge in education. Accordingly, authors who submit manuscripts to the Pertanika Journal of Learning, Pedagogy and Educational Leadership (PJLPEL) are generally invited to reciprocate by serving as peer reviewers for relevant manuscripts.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process

PJLPEL implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. This process is a cornerstone of integrity in scholarly publishing. Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief from among subject-matter experts to evaluate manuscripts objectively. The aim is to ensure accuracy, validity, and the quality of the work before publication. All complete manuscripts are reviewed according to the following principles:

• Conduct reviews fairly, transparently and professionally.

• Avoid any personal remarks about the authors.

• Provide clear and well-founded justifications for all comments.

• Structure reviews systematically to help authors improve their manuscripts.

• Offer constructive criticism aimed at enhancing the manuscript’s quality.
  
  

Quality and Oversight of Peer Review

All submitted manuscripts are initially screened by the Editorial Board to ensure their suitability for the scope and focus of PJLPEL. Manuscripts meeting the required criteria are sent for peer review by one or two experts in the relevant field, and in certain cases, specialists in areas such as statistics or methodology may be consulted. The quality of reviewer reports is assessed by the Editor-in-Chief, and this performance record is used as the basis for future appointments. All reviewer performance data are confidential and accessible only to the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers must avoid any action or statements that may reveal their identity to authors. While reviewers are encouraged to recommend actions on manuscripts, final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief, particularly in cases of conflicting reviews. The Editor-in-Chief also ensures continuous improvement of the peer review process through regular monitoring and structured enhancements.