Before you accept or decline the invitation to evaluate research, read these points:

1- Does the current research match your exact specialty? Accept the evaluation of the research if you believe that it falls within your competence and that you can carry out a solid scientific evaluation process.

2- Do you have a potential conflict of interest with the subject or authors? Send these belongings to the editor-in-chief when answering the evaluation request.

3- Do you have enough time to evaluate the research? Sober scientific evaluation of research takes time, before you commit to it, make sure you know the deadline for sending a research evaluation.

 

 

How to evaluate a research in the Journal of Education for the Humanities:

The assessor''s assessment should be a comprehensive critique of the research submitted for publication, and it should be in the form of an integrated report, rather than a few short sentences. The Journal of Education for Humanities does not require a specific model for the structure of the scientific evaluation report, but the following parts of the report can be used:

 - the abstract

- The main and important points

- Minor points

The Journal of Education for Humanities encourages the scientific evaluator to assist researchers in improving the scientific content of their research papers. Therefore, the scientific evaluation report must give a constructive analysis with clear evidence to the researcher, especially those parts of the research that require modifications. In cases where the scientific evaluator does not want the researcher to see his comment regarding the research, then those comments can be sent to the editor-in-chief of the journal confidentially. The evaluation process may differ from one scientific evaluator to another, but the scientific evaluator must pay attention to the following aspects as much as possible:

1- Is the topic of the current research previously mentioned?

2- Is there a need for ethical approvals for conducting the research or does it need such approvals?

3- Are the objectives and hypotheses of the research complex?

4- Is the research methodology used appropriate and sufficient to answer the study questions?

5- Are the statistical treatments used correct and sufficient, and were their results correctly included?

6- Are the figures and tables adequately explained, and do they represent the results accurately?

7- Have the studies, previous works and research done by the researcher and which were included in the current study adequately discussed?

8- Have the results of studies related to the current research been compared well?

9- Is there an incorrect listing of the sources, if a source was used in a topic that is different from the place in which it was listed,

10- Do the results of the current study support the conclusions paragraph?

11- Is the research summary an accurate summary of the current research and its results without repetition?

14- Is the current research language clear and understandable?

To help researchers to make corrections quickly, the evaluator must send a copy of the research that was evaluated through the research tracking system sent for publication in the Education Journal for Humanities. The scientific evaluator should contact the journal, in order to make an amendment to the final time for submitting the evaluated research.

We in the Journal of Education for Humanities encourage the scientific evaluator to constructive criticism of the research under examination and scrutiny and to focus in his report on objectivity in criticism of the scientific aspects of research, which includes, for example, the integrity of research methods and methodology The current conclusion is strongly supported by the results of the study. At the end of the research evaluation process, the evaluator will be asked the following question, which of these options do you recommend regarding the current research:

- Acceptable

- It needs major modifications

- Needs minor modifications

- unacceptable

- Unable to rate the search

Confidentiality in the research evaluation process:

Research sent for the purpose of evaluation must be kept strictly confidential throughout the evaluation process. The scientific evaluator should not share information about the research under evaluation or discuss its content with anyone else outside the research evaluation process. The scientific evaluator may, upon his request, consult with one of his colleagues who is related to the subject of the research and who are trusted, with the confidentiality of the subject of the research being evaluated. In such cases, the researcher must first contact the Journal of Education for the Humanities or its editor-in-chief and be notified of the name of the colleague he wishes to communicate with in this regard, with his information included in the “comment to the editor” field in the evaluation report.

 

conflict of interest

The scientific evaluator should refuse to evaluate the research in one of the following cases:

1- It is one of the commercial interests of the research topic.

2- He previously discussed or expressed his opinion and advice on the subject of the research with the researcher.

3- When he feels his inability to be objective in evaluating the research for any reason.