About the Journal

EDITORIAL POLICY

The Higher Education Research Review (HERR) is the official higher education research journal of Guimaras State University. Published annually, it provides an open scholarly venue for disseminating research and other academic work across disciplines. All submissions undergo independent editorial screening, double-blind peer review, and editing to promote scientific and academic merit.

Types of Contributions

  • Empirical articles
  • Theoretical articles
  • Review articles
  • Methodological articles
  • Philosophical articles
  • Creative works

SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPTS

All manuscripts must be submitted through the Guimaras State University Open Journal Systems (OJS). Authors must register or log in to submit. The corresponding author is responsible for completing the online submission and ensuring that all required metadata and files are accurate and complete.

  • The submission is original and is the intellectual property of the author(s).
  • The manuscript has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal.
  • All references have been checked for accuracy and completeness.
  • All tables and figures are numbered and labeled.
  • Permission has been obtained for photographs, datasets, and other third-party material, when applicable.
  • The manuscript uses respectful and scholarly language.

HERR may require supporting documents when necessary for authentication, ethics compliance, authorship, permissions, or other editorial purposes.

PEER REVIEW SYSTEM

HERR subjects submitted scholarly work to independent evaluation by qualified external reviewers with appropriate expertise. The journal follows a strict double-blind peer-review process in which the identities of authors and reviewers are withheld from each other.

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are evaluated for significance and contribution, methodological rigor, substance, clarity of exposition, technical appropriateness, and ethical compliance.

Editorial Recommendations

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revision
  • Accept with major revision
  • Reject with option to resubmit
  • Reject without option to resubmit

When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board may seek clarification or invite an additional independent reviewer before reaching a decision. The final editorial decision rests with the Editorial Board.

CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION

Initial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial screening before external peer review. The screening determines whether the manuscript meets the journal’s scholarly, technical, ethical, originality, and submission requirements and is suitable for further evaluation.

  • Quality and significance of the contribution – demonstrates scholarly merit, relevance, originality, appropriate theoretical or conceptual grounding, clarity of analysis, and meaningful contribution to knowledge and/or practice.
  • Technical appropriateness – complies with the journal’s prescribed structure, formatting, academic writing, citation and referencing requirements, and other author guidelines.
  • Ethical considerations – demonstrates compliance with applicable ethical principles, including beneficence, justice, respect, informed consent, privacy, confidentiality, and participant protection where applicable.
  • Similarity and originality – undergo the journal’s designated originality/similarity screening. Similarity reports are interpreted through editorial judgment; evidence of plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, or other publication misconduct may result in revision or rejection.

The Editorial Board may require ethics clearance, informed-consent documentation, permissions, or other pertinent records when applicable. Manuscripts that do not satisfy the journal’s requirements may be returned for revision or declined during initial screening.

Technical Appropriateness

Manuscripts must demonstrate satisfactory compliance with the journal’s technical and scholarly requirements before external peer review. Technical screening considers the following:

  • Title – accurately and concisely represents the study and avoids unnecessary abbreviations.
  • Author Information – provides complete author names, institutional affiliations, country, ORCID iDs, and corresponding-author information.
  • Abstract – concisely presents the purpose, methodology, principal findings, and conclusion.
  • Introduction – establishes the background, significance, research gap, scholarly context, and purpose or objectives.
  • Materials and Methods/Methodology – adequately describes the research design, setting, participants or data sources, sampling, instruments, data-gathering procedures, analysis, and ethical safeguards.
  • Results and Discussion – presents and interprets findings logically according to the objectives and in relation to relevant literature, theory, previous research, and context.
  • Organization and Development of Ideas – demonstrates coherence, logical sequencing, and consistency among manuscript sections.
  • Conclusion – directly addresses the objectives and presents evidence-based conclusions and implications without merely repeating the discussion.
  • Mechanics and Language Use – demonstrates appropriate grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence construction, word choice, and scholarly style.
  • Tables and Figures – includes only relevant, properly numbered, titled/captioned, and cited tables and figures.
  • In-Text Citations – properly acknowledges textual, visual, data, and other sources.
  • Reference List – contains only cited works and provides accurate, complete bibliographic information in the journal’s prescribed style.

External Review

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are forwarded to two independent external reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject and methodology of the manuscript. Reviewers assess the significance of the contribution, substance and scholarly quality of the content, methodological soundness, and clarity of exposition.

Reviewers provide specific comments and recommendations. The editorial office consolidates and communicates these to the authors. When assessments substantially conflict, the Editor-in-Chief may seek clarification or invite a third independent reviewer.

Double-Blind Process

The GSU Center for Journal Publications implements a strict double-blind peer-review process. Author identities are withheld from reviewers, and reviewer identities are withheld from authors throughout the review process.

Reviewer Selection and Qualification

The journal selects reviewers based on their expertise, specialization, research experience, publication record, and relevance to the manuscript's subject and methodology. All reviewers are external, and the Editorial Board selects and appoints them.

Reviewers must demonstrate scholarly competence in their field and have published at least five research papers in refereed journals within the past five consecutive years. The Center for Journal Publications maintains a pool of qualified external reviewers. When an appropriate expert is unavailable, the Editorial Board may identify and invite other qualified reviewers. For highly specialized manuscripts, authors may be asked to suggest potential experts; the Editorial Board retains final reviewer selection.

The Editorial Board considers reviewer independence, relevant expertise, publication experience, confidentiality, and potential conflicts of interest when assigning manuscripts.

Scoring System

Score Editorial Recommendation
5 Accept without revision
4 Accept with minor revision
3 Accept with major revision
2 Reject with option to resubmit
1 Reject without option to resubmit

The mean score is determined from the reviewers’ ratings. Editorial action is based on the reviewers’ recommendations together with the judgment of the Editorial Board. Authors are expected to address applicable reviewer and editorial comments before final acceptance.

Transmittal of Review Comments and Author Revision

Following peer review, the Editorial Board communicates the editorial decision and consolidated reviewer comments to the corresponding author. Authors whose manuscripts require revision are normally given fifteen (15) days to submit the revised manuscript unless otherwise specified by the Editorial Office.

The revised manuscript should adequately address reviewer and editorial recommendations. It may undergo further editorial evaluation or an additional round of peer review, as needed. Completion of revision does not constitute final acceptance; publication remains subject to final editorial approval.

Finalization of Journal Entries

The Editorial Board determines the final manuscripts accepted for publication after completion of the required editorial, peer-review, revision, ethical, and technical processes.

LANGUAGE, SIMILARITY, AND ORIGINALITY CHECK

Language and Grammar Check

Authors are responsible for clear, grammatically appropriate, and professional academic writing. The Editorial Office may use appropriate language- and grammar-checking tools as part of quality control and may require language revision when deficiencies affect clarity or scholarly presentation.

Similarity and Originality Check

Submitted manuscripts undergo originality and similarity screening using iThenticate before peer review. Editors evaluate similarity reports through editorial judgment rather than solely by a numerical score. Properly cited quotations, references, common terminology, and legitimate textual matches may be considered when interpreting the report.

Evidence of plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text recycling, data fabrication, data falsification, or other forms of publication misconduct may result in revision or rejection. The Editorial Board may request clarification or supporting documentation when originality concerns arise.

COPYRIGHT POLICY

Authors retain copyright in their contributions. Other elements of HERR, including the journal name, structure, and organization, remain protected and are the property of the Guimaras State University Center for Journal Publications.

Declaration of Previous Publication

Authors must disclose any prior print or online publication, dissemination, or substantial overlap involving the submitted manuscript. A manuscript must not be simultaneously under consideration by another journal. Authors are responsible for securing permission to reproduce copyrighted material when required.

Policy for Handling Complaints

Complaints involving copyright or intellectual-property infringement, material inaccuracies, libelous or unlawful material, or publication misconduct will be investigated. The journal may request supporting evidence and will determine appropriate corrective action based on the circumstances and applicable standards.

POLICY ON CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Authors must disclose all actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the conduct, interpretation, or publication of the research. Relevant financial, institutional, professional, commercial, or other relationships should be declared. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that disclosures are complete and accurate.

AUTHORSHIP AND ORIGINALITY

Author Undertaking

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work and who accept responsibility for the submitted manuscript. The corresponding author is responsible for accurate submission metadata and for ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Authors may be required to submit authorship, copyright, clearance, or other supporting documents prescribed by the journal through OJS or the Editorial Office.

Originality Undertaking

Submission constitutes a declaration that the work is original, has not been previously published, and is not simultaneously under consideration elsewhere. Authors must properly acknowledge all ideas, data, figures, tables, text, and other materials derived from existing sources.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice

HERR is committed to high standards of publication ethics and scholarly integrity. Authors attest that submitted works represent their scholarly contributions and have not been plagiarized, fabricated, falsified, or improperly duplicated. Editors and reviewers are expected to provide objective, fair, confidential, constructive, and timely evaluation and to avoid actual or perceived conflicts of interest.

Suspected breaches of publication ethics should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief. The journal will investigate credible concerns and take appropriate editorial action.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Statement

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the conduct of the research or preparation of the manuscript. The disclosure should identify the tool used, its purpose and extent of use, and confirm that all AI-assisted content was reviewed and verified by the authors.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, citation, and ethical compliance of the work. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

SCHEDULE OF PUBLICATION AND CIRCULATION

Schedule

Higher Education Research Review is published annually in December by the Guimaras State University Center for Journal Publications.

Access and Circulation

HERR provides access to published scholarly content through the Guimaras State University Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. The journal is also produced in print for dissemination to public and private institutions, agencies, libraries, research institutions, authors, and other designated stakeholders, in accordance with University publication and dissemination policies.

PRIVACY STATEMENT

Names and email addresses entered in the journal site are used exclusively for the stated purposes of HERR and are not made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

BOARD ADJUDICATION

The Editorial Board is responsible for final editorial decisions based on screening, external peer review, author compliance with required revisions, ethical and technical requirements, and the overall scholarly quality and suitability of the manuscript. The Editorial Board’s final publication decision is final and unappealable.