Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

African Journal of Teacher Education (AJOTE) is a forum for examining, discussing, and publicising local, national, regional and trans/continental policies, practices, experiments and research on the training, preparation, hiring, and retention of teachers for all levels and tiers of Africa’s education sector.

AJOTE welcomes interdisciplinary and comparative exploration of all topics in the field of teacher education. Interim, tentative, and complete project reports and commentaries are welcome. In addition to feature articles, experiment and research digest ideas, and reviews, AJOTE accepts audio, video and film contributions.

The journal will publish articles on broad topics relating to the theme of teacher education, but occasionally, the journal’s regular or guest editors might focus particular issues of the journal on specific themes.

AJOTE is moving onto a rolling publishing schedule. Hence, it will publish individual articles as they become ready for publication rather than wait until there are enough articles for a full issue.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Policy Guidelines **


Table of Contents

          A.   Journal Editor and the Review process 

          B.   Foundation of Fair Editorial Decisions 

          C.   Editorial Independence 

          D.   Editor & Conflict of Interest

          E.   Editorial Decision Making and Communication with Authors.

          F.    Dealing with Rejected Manuscripts that are Resubmitted by Authors.

          G.    Reviewers/Editorial Board Members' Responsibilities


A.   Journal Editor and the Review Process


1. The editor sees each manuscript through the evaluation process; from pre-review or screening to full double blind review. When necessary and feasible, the editor would engage external reviewers, again in a blinded condition for an additional opinion.

2. The editor, and not the reviewer, makes the final decision to accept or reject a submission. This is without prejudice to the fact that he/she must uphold the integrity of the review process as a thorough scholarly one.

3. For the peer review process, the editor may engage one, two, or three persons to review a manuscript, guided by a number of factors, including: whether a sufficient pool of reviewers is available; whether a particular reviewer is a noted expert whose single opinion is sufficient to base decision on; and whether the manuscript submitted has a quality that requires that more than one or two reviewers are needed for a fair decision.

4. The editor may identify potential reviewers for a manuscript on the basis of personal knowledge of the topic or from among the authors of references in the manuscript, or on the basis of author suggestion.

5. The editor must ensure that manuscripts are masked: that the identity of the author is not known to the reviewers nor reviewers' identity known to author during the review process.

6. The editor is responsible for keeping track of reviewers, and taking steps to make sure reviews are completed in a timely manner. The editor may also wish to include in the reviewer database judgments regarding the promptness and quality of reviewers.

7. If a reviewer does not complete a review on a timely basis, the editor will proceed with evaluation of the manuscript. S/he can make a decision to accept or reject the manuscript based on the comments and recommendations of another reviewer(s) or his/her own evaluation of the manuscript, or by seeking additional review.

8. Should any reason arise to delay the review of a manuscript beyond the advertised period, the editor will advise the author promptly.

9. Revised manuscripts will be evaluated by editors to determine if the revisions are satisfactory, and will not be automatically returned to reviewers. An exception might be when the revised manuscript includes changes that may have introduced important new shortcomings about which the editor needs advice from one or more of the original reviewers.

10. Revised manuscripts will not be sent to new reviewers.


B.  Foundation of Fair Editorial Decisions


11. Editorial decisions will not be affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors. Decisions to edit and publish will not be determined by the policies of governments or other agencies outside of the journal itself.

 12. Decisions to edit and publish manuscripts will be based on characteristics of the manuscripts themselves and how they relate to the journal's purposes and readers. Among these characteristics are the importance of the topic, originality, methodological strength, clarity and completeness of written expression, and potential interest to readers. Editors will also take into account whether studies are ethical and whether their publication might cause harm to readers or to the public interest.


C.   Editorial Independence


13. The editor's primary responsibilities are to inform and educate readers, with attention to the accuracy and importance of journal articles, and to protect and strengthen the integrity and quality of this journal and its intellectual and scholarly processes.

14. The Managing Editor and Spread Corporation Board of Directors support the core values and objectives of Spread Corporation and are ultimately responsible for all aspects of producing the journal, including staffing, budget, and online publication. 

15. The Editor has full authority over the editorial content of the journal. The Managing Editor will not interfere in the evaluation, selection, or editing of individual articles, either directly or by creating an environment in which editorial decisions are strongly influenced.

16. However, the limits of editorial freedom would be considered breached under certain conditions. These conditions include if the editor falls into a pattern of taking strong, consistent, one-sided positions against the core values and policies of Spread Corporation and of the specific journal over which he/she has oversight; if the editor shows a pattern of bad editorial decisions; if the editor disagrees with the long-term editorial direction of the journal; or if the editor is convicted of criminal acts or ethical lapses that are incompatible with a position of trust.

17. Another condition under which either side may end their contract would be if, for whatever reason, Spread Corporation and the editor find they are unable to work together in a spirit of mutual trust and collaboration.

18. The Managing Editor may arrange for the publication of hard copy versions of  issues of this journal as necessary.


D.   Editor & Conflict of Interest


19. It is the responsibility of the editor to not make decisions regarding manuscripts about which s/he may have a conflict of interest. An example would be when manuscripts are submitted by members of the editor's own institution or people who have been collaborators of the editor in the past. In this instance, the manuscript will have to be sent to the Managing Editor, who in turn may hand it over to an outsider of the journal's editorial office who is given full power to select reviewers and make decisions regarding acceptance or rejection of the said submission.

20. In the unlikely case that the editor chooses to make a submission, other than an editorial, to his/her own journal, the editorial review process and decision on such manuscript must be handed over to the Managing Editor or to another third party that the latter may delegate to the task.

21.The editor must ensure that s/he has no personal, professional or financial involvement in any of the issues that comes under his/her judgment.



E.   Editorial Decision Making and Communication with Authors.


22. While the editor makes the final decisions to accept or reject a manuscript, it is to be understood that he/she has a right to discretionary consultation with associate editors or other experts outside of the editorial body, provided that such consultations are accorded status equivalent to and treated as another review report.

23. The editor will communicate decisions to manuscript authors, where necessary, providing explanations for his decision separate from and independent of the comments of reviewers.

24. If reviewers' comments on a manuscript turn out to be contradictory, the editor must decide and tell the authors which comments to follow for revision purposes. Editors may add their own comments and suggestions for revision.

25. Where two reviewers' reports conflict, the editor will inform reviewers of his/her decision.


F.   Dealing with Rejected Manuscripts that are Resubmitted by Authors.


26.The editor-in-chief may choose to not engage in further correspondence on decision to not publish a submission.

27.The above is without prejudice to authors who feel strongly that the reviewers and the editor have erred in their judgment and have made mistakes that they (authors) can adequately address. In this case, a re-submission with detailed response to all the points made in the rejection letter might be justified.

28.If a paper is revised well enough that every reason given for its rejection has been taken care of, it has become a new paper and could technically go through the pre-review and review processes afresh.


G.   Reviewers /Editorial Board Members' Responsibilities


29. We select our peer reviewers on the basis of our judgment of their expertise and ability to provide high quality, constructive, and fair reviews.  Critique of writing style alone is probably the least important aspect of a reviewer's task.  Reviewers are expected to be experts in the manuscript's content area, research methods, or both.

30. Reviewers have the indispensable role of evaluating manuscripts critically but constructively and of preparing detailed comments about the research and the manuscript to help authors improve their work.

31. Reviewers also make recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of manuscripts for publication in the journal. The journal's review instrument should be used for this purpose.

32. Reviewers who feel that a manuscript is not in their area of expertise should decline to evaluate the manuscript. This is one of a number of check-off items in the form that all our reviewers fill out when they accept to evaluate a manuscript.

33. Reviewers should declare to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review, and in most instances when such conflicts exist should decline to review the manuscript to guide against biased judgment.

34. Reviewers must treat manuscripts under evaluation as confidential documents and should work to complete the reviews promptly such that authors do not suffer loss should there be a need to start a new submission process to a different journal.

35. Reviewers should not show manuscripts to anyone else without the express consent of the editor.

36. Reviewers' comments to be sent to authors about their manuscripts should not be derogatory. It would be within the right of the editor to edit any such comment or even withhold the entire comment of the affected reviewer from the author.

37. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript under consideration.

38. Reviewers should not communicate directly with authors or even identify themselves to authors during the review process, except by signing their reviews.

39. Reviewer may sign their comments for transmittal to authors if they wish, but this is not a requirement.


**Much of this has been adopted or adapted from the World Association of Medical Editors'http://www.wame.org website


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.



This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...


Submission Guidelines

1) AJOTE accepts only original works.
2) Submissions can be emailed as MsWord or RTF file attachments. Audio and video submissions should be compatible with Windows Media Player, Quick Time player, or Real Player.  All images should come as separate jpg, gif or tiff file attachments, even if they are already embedded in the main articles.
3) Authors should also include a brief bio of about 100 words for the "Notes on Contributors" section.
4) All submissions must come with short but excellent abstracts.
5) Authors should make clear in their submission that (a)      the submission is original and not being considered for publication elsewhere (b)      they have read, understood and accepted the conditions under which AJOTE publishes submissions by authors as laid out in the Submission Guidelines and Right-to-Copy paragraphs of the journal, (c)     all authors of a multi-author work have endorsed the work. Please refer to author checklist and download form to  accompany your submission.
6) AJOTE requests authors to obtain release letters for unpublished materials and permissions for all copyrighted materials that are included in their works. The permission requests should make clear that the materials for which permissions are being sought will be published online under free access terms.
7) AJOTE does not archive materials that have been rejected for publication in the journal. They are  expunged from our system, hence, Spread Corporation and the editors of AJOTE will not be in a position to resend, return, or refer to them in any way.
8) In addition to preliminary evaluation by the journal editor, submissions will be subjected to double blind peer reviews to enhance quality and ensure merit. The decision of the editor is final.
9) We hope to have the review process completed and review report sent to authors within two months
10) Other than providing copies or summaries of evaluation report for rejected submissions if requested by authors, AJOTE editors will not engage in correspondence on  decision to not publish a submission.
11) The APA referencing format is style of preference forAJOTE .
12) AJOTE accepts submissions in English and French not longer than 25 double spaced letter sized pages.
13) Papers written in Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Arabic, Swahili, Igbo, Hausa and Yoruba will also be accepted provided they are accompanied by short but excellent summaries, together with their full notes and bibliography, in either English or French.

ISSN: 1916-7822

Published by SPREAD Corporation (Sustainable Programs for Reducing Educational and Avocational Disadvantages)