Editors ' guidelines

Editors ' guidelines
The role of the editor is to deal with peer review of manuscripts, make recommendations on the acceptance or rejection of a research and attract high-quality applications.
Here are some guidelines for editors, based on COPE's code of conduct and best practice guidelines for magazine editors.some guidelines for editors
Selection of reviewers
Editors should ensure that suitable reviewers have been selected to submit applications (i.e. individuals who are able to judge the work and not from the exclusion of competing interests).
Editors should ideally select at least three reviewers to submit a report.
Editors should stop using reviewers who constantly give rude, poor-quality or overdue reviews.
Editors should use a wide range of sources (not just personal contacts) to identify potential new reviewers (e.g. bibliographic databases).
The review process
Editors should handle any papers assigned to them in a timely manner with a view to making a preliminary decision within 3 months.
Editors should strive to handle all the papers assigned to them, regardless of the subject area of the paper, and returning the paper to the section editor for reassignment should be only exceptional. Section editors try to assign papers appropriately but also to balance the loads on individual editors across the editorial board; sometimes the assignment of a paper whose scope is beyond the scope of the assigned editor is inevitable.
Editors should provide written feedback to the authors regarding any decision made even if this decision clearly follows from the reviewers 'comments, in which case one or two sentences summarizing the reviewers' comments are appropriate.
Editors should be prepared to justify any significant deviation from the described peer review process.
Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review any submission.
Editors should monitor the performance of peer reviewers and take steps to ensure that this is at a high level.
Editors should encourage reviewers to comment on the following:
Ethical questions and possible misconduct in research and publication raised by submissions (e.g. unethical research design, inappropriate data manipulation, presentation).
Originality of submissions, vigilance for over-publication and plagiarism.
Resolutions
The recommendation of editors to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on peer reviews and their own views on the relevance, originality, clarity of the paper, the correctness of the study and its relevance to the competence of the journal.
Editors can recommend rejecting a research immediately if the material does not meet the standard of the Journal of the Faculty of basic education.Editors should not reverse the decision to accept the submission unless serious problems with the submission are identified.
New editors should not reverse the decisions to publish articles submitted by the previous editor unless serious problems are identified.
Editors should mark any suspected cases of misconduct or disputed copyrights with the editor-in-chief or publisher