Peer Review Policy

All research manuscripts submitted to ETERNAL: English Teaching Journal undergo a double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

1. Review stages

Stage	Activity	Estimated time
1. Initial screening	The editor checks fit with the Aims and Scope, compliance with the template and Author Guidelines, and similarity (Turnitin). Manuscripts may be desk-rejected or returned for formatting.	1–2 weeks
2. Peer review	The manuscript is anonymised and sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in ELT or applied linguistics, who assess originality, relevance, methodology, analysis, discussion, and writing quality.	3–4 weeks
3. Editorial decision	Based on the reviews, the editor decides: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. When reviewers disagree, the editor may invite an additional reviewer.	1 week
4. Revision	Authors revise the manuscript and submit a response letter addressing each comment. Major revisions may be sent back to the reviewers.	2–4 weeks (author)
5. Final decision & production	Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout, proofreading by the author, DOI registration, and publication in the scheduled issue.	2–4 weeks

2. Principles

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief and is based solely on scholarly merit, not on the authors' nationality, institution, gender, or other personal characteristics.
Reviewers and editors treat manuscripts as confidential and declare any conflict of interest.
Manuscripts by editorial board members are handled independently by another editor.
Authors may appeal a decision by sending a reasoned letter to the editor; appeals are evaluated by an editor not involved in the original decision.

The list of reviewers is available on the Reviewers page.