• Full manuscripts are to be submitted in English;

• Manuscript submissions are to constitute a contribution to the development of knowledge and practice in the thematic area identified in the Journal issue;

• Authors are expected to submit original work on the theme and any sub-themes for the issue;

• Either empirical studies or theoretical/conceptual papers can be considered;

• Two peer reviewers shall be selected to undertake blind reviews in accordance with established standards;

• All manuscripts which may have been presented in the CXC® Regional Education Conference will be considered. Where manuscripts are submitted and, were not orally presented at the conference, such a manuscript may also be submitted for peer review. If such a manuscript is acceptable it will be considered for the issue only if there is Journal issue capacity for it to be published;

• The manuscripts should consider the following format for publication:

• Citation Style: American Psychological Association (APA), latest edition
• Language: English 
• Font, line-spacing, alignment: Times New Roman, 1.5 lines in MS Word, 12-point font, margins 2.5 cm, and left alignment. 
• Sub-theme: If the conference, indicate the Sub-theme
• Length: 3,000-6,000 words (excluding references and appendices)

• Title page: The front page should include the title only. 
• Abstract: Shall not exceed 250 words and must state the research problem, rationale, and its significance, purpose or aim of the study, the methodology used, key results and/ or findings and main conclusions; five relevant keywords (inclusive of the research design(s) and approach) should be placed immediately below the abstract. 
• Pages: Minimum of 7 pages and maximum of 10 pages aligned with standard length (including charts, tables, diagrams and references/ citations/bibliography)
• Introduction: State background – nature, rationale, significance, and scope of the problem investigated, and the research questions.
• Literature Review: Include a review of the pertinent literature to ‘situate’ the problem within the gaps in the literature that the study sought to address.
• Materials & Methods: Provide the details of the materials and methods used; research design, sample selection, data collection procedures, data analysis, reliability & validity and/ or trustworthiness, and ethical issues considered.
• Results and/ or Findings: Summarise and present the results and/ or findings in a clear and concise manner; tables, graphs, or other illustrations may be used as appropriate; report descriptive and/ or inferential statistics as appropriate; present themes as appropriate. 
• Discussion: Explain the results and/ or findings in relation to the research questions/objectives; show how the results and/ or findings and interpretations of them agree (or disagree) with the published literature; present alternative interpretations (if any); and discuss the theoretical or practical implications. 
• Conclusion: State conclusions clearly based on the results and/or findings; summarise the evidence for each conclusion. 
• References: APA, latest edition.
• Acknowledgements (Optional) 
• Appendix (Optional) 

HOW WILL MY MANUSCRIPT BE ASSESSED FOR JOURNAL ISSUE ACCEPTANCE?

The following criteria are used by peer reviewers when rating manuscripts:

Criterion	Descriptors	Points
1: Originality of ideas/ or approach and level of appropriateness	Are the ideas advanced in the paper new?If conceptual, does the paper expand scholarly understanding of a new domain?Does the paper introduce new constructs or concepts that broaden existing ideological understanding or practices?	5
2: Relevance to sub-themes	Is the content relevant to the theme and sub-themes of the conference? Are they sufficiently addressing the questions in relation to the sub-theme?Does the paper address a theoretical or empirical problem?	5
Criterion	Descriptors	Points
3-Quality of the theoretical or conceptual argument	Does the paper present a clear, precise and comprehensive review of relevant literature? Does the theoretical argument engage the conceptual/ empirical investigation appropriately?	5
4- Quality of empirical or conceptual design	If the paper/extended abstract is EMPIRICAL, please consider the following questions: Are the methods used to collect and analyse data appropriate to the research questions asked? Are the data collection and analysis methods clearly explained and without major flaws? If the paper/extended abstract is CONCEPTUAL, please consider the following questions: Do(es) the author(s) provide a clear argument for why it is important to discuss, define, and/or question specific concepts, models, and/or ideas?	10
5- Quality of development and support for the propositions/hypotheses, if appropriate	If the paper is EMPIRICAL, please consider the following questions: Does the paper establish a clear link between theory and evidence? Does the author conclude beyond what the data support? If the paper is CONCEPTUAL, please consider the following questions: Does the paper develop adequate and innovative propositions to clarify, define, and question core concepts in the field/discipline of education and/or to develop a new theory or perspective?	10
6- Presentation: Coherence and clarity of structure and thought	Are relevant terms and concepts explained? Does the paper have a clear line of argument? Does the paper use accessible and comprehensible language?	10
7- Impact in the field	Does the paper discuss possible implications for new theory? Does the paper clearly spell out its own original theory contribution? Is the content in the paper likely to impact practices in educational digitalization, credentialing, assessment among other relevant considerations and how?	5

WHAT WILL BE THE RESULT OF THE PEER REVIEW?

Following peer review of your manuscript by reviewers, you may receive ‘accept’, ‘accept with minor revisions’, ‘revise and resubmit (with major revisions)’ or ‘reject’. Conditions are reflected as stated below.

Accept	The paper makes a strong and original contribution. Meets Journal’s ethical, scholarly, and formatting standards. Requires no substantive changes; only minor copyediting may be needed.
Accept with Minor Revisions	The paper is fundamentally sound and suitable for publication. Requires small adjustments (e.g., clarifications, minor reorganization, refining language, correcting citations). Does not require additional data collection or major restructuring.
Revise and Resubmit (Major Revisions)	The paper has potential but requires substantial revision before it can be reconsidered. Issues may include gaps in argumentation, unclear methodology, weak analysis, or insufficient alignment with the Journal’s scope. Authors must address significant concerns before the Editorial Board can make a final decision.
Reject	The paper does not meet the Journal’s standards or scope. Contains serious methodological flaws, ethical concerns, or lacks originality. Revisions would not make it suitable for publication.

HOW DO I SUBMIT MY MANUSCRIPT TO THE CJEA?

For this first issue, authors are asked to submit their manuscripts to the CJEA online application portal on http://www.cxc.org. You will be asked to provide personal information, conference-related information and required to upload your manuscript for review by Friday, May 15, 2026.