International Journal of Chinese Language Education

Reviewer Guidelines

The International Journal of Chinese Language Education (IJCLE) publishes high-quality research in Chinese language teaching and learning by scholars throughout the world. Peer review is essential to our mission of building a coherent knowledge base across geographic and intellectual borders. Reviewers should familiarise themselves with the following ethical guidelines and evaluation criteria before undertaking a review.

1. Peer Review Ethics

IJCLE is committed to the highest standards of ethical peer review. As a reviewer, you are expected to adhere to the following principles:

Conflicts of Interest:Please carefully consider whether you have any potential conflicts of interest before undertaking the review. If, before accepting the review invitation or during the review process, you become aware of the identity of the author(s) and identify any of the potential conflicts of interest listed below, you should decline the invitation or contact the Editorial Office immediately:
- Joint affiliation or service within the same department, institute, or unit during the past three years;
- Co-authorship or co-editorship during the past three years;
- Collaboration on research projects or grant applications during the past three years;
- Adviser or advisee relationship for PhD/Master/Bachelor thesis in the past; or
- Spousal, family, or other close personal relationship.
- If you are unsure whether a relationship constitutes a conflict of interest, please contact the Editorial Office for advice.
Double-Blind Review: IJCLE uses a double-blind peer review process. If you discover the identity of the author(s) through any means, please inform the journal editor immediately.
Confidentiality: The peer review process is strictly confidential. You must not make personal use of unpublished information, communicate the content of manuscripts to others, or contact the author(s) directly.
Objectivity: Please be careful not to make judgements about the paper based on personal, financial, or intellectual biases, or any considerations other than the quality of the research and written presentation of the paper.
Citation Manipulation: Reviewers should not suggest that authors include citations of the reviewer’s work merely to increase their citation count. Suggestions on citation inclusion must be based on valid academic reasons.

2. How to Review for IJCLE

Invitation: You will be emailed an invitation to review a manuscript.
Response: Please click the response link in the email to indicate whether you agree or decline to review the manuscript. Once you respond, you will receive a confirmation email. If you do not respond, you may receive email reminders. After three working days with no response, another reviewer may be invited to review the manuscript.
Confirmation: If you accept the review invitation, you will receive a confirmation email with the full manuscript and the review form. You will then have three weeks to complete the review.
Extensions: If you are unable to return a review by the deadline, please contact the IJCLE Editorial Office to request an extension.
Reassignment: If you miss the deadline by more than one week and have not responded to the Editorial Office’s reminder emails, the manuscript may be reassigned to another reviewer.
Revisions: If the author(s) are invited to revise and resubmit a manuscript, IJCLE will send the revised manuscript to the same reviewers who evaluated the original submission.

3. Evaluating the Manuscript

At its core, research involves making a principled argument based on theory and evidence. As you review a manuscript, please consider the following questions:

Background: How well have the authors located their inquiry against a background of extant knowledge? Are the citations relevant, comprehensive, and accurately reflecting current research and assumptions?
Originality and Innovation: Does the manuscript offer novel perspectives, new insights, or innovative approaches to the field of Chinese language education?
Methodology: How good is the fit between the research question(s) and methodology?
Significance: How is the research significant for informing and improving theory and/or practice in Chinese language education?
Organisation and Structure: Is the manuscript logically organised? Is there a clear, coherent chain of reasoning by which the authors organise their arguments and evidence to reach their conclusions?
Language and Clarity: Is the writing clear, concise, and professional? Are the arguments articulated effectively and accessible to the academic community?

4. Crafting a Constructive Review

A good review makes explicit the bases for your comments and recommendations. We offer the following suggestions to help you craft a highly effective review:

Make Your Thinking Public: A good review makes explicit the bases for your comments and recommendations. If you state that “one simply cannot use these studies to reach this conclusion,” or “the research makes a compelling case,” please say why. Your critique should be consistent with the overall recommendation you make concerning publication.
Be Well Organised: It is often helpful to start by briefly summarising what the authors did, what they found, and how they interpreted the findings. Separate methodological or technical issues from conceptual ones, and stage your comments to make clear what the big issues of concern are as opposed to small issues.
Be Constructive: A good review should be formative as well as summative. Even if a manuscript should be rejected, give feedback that will help the authors improve their manuscript. Be specific and to the point. Please write your review as if you are addressing the author(s) rather than the editors. It will also help establish a collegial and friendly tone.

5. AI Use in Peer Review