Review Process

Peer Review Process

Double-blind peer review
This journal operates under a Double-Blind Peer Review Policy, either for articles submitted through our ongoing submissions procedure, or for those articles to be included in thematic issues (by invitation and/or self-proposal submissions).

So, when submitting an article, make sure that the uploaded document includes only the title (without any references to acknowledgments, financial support, authors’ names or affiliation) and that the text does not include self-references easily identified by readers.

The selective process of submitted articles begins with the editorial analysis. The internal editorial process of the journal eliminates any data on the authors’ identity from the body of the original texts. The submitted papers are subject to a PRE-revision of the formal aspects of the proposal and their adequacy to Sisyphus’ main research lines [Education XXI and Change Forces in Education] and, eventually, to a specific thematic issue. This preliminary revision is undertaken by the editors themselves and/or by the invited editors if the article has been submitted to a specific thematic issue (either by invitation and/or self-proposal submissions). 

If a paper overcomes this first phase, it will be evaluated by, at least, two reviewers (double-blind peer review), who will suggest whether or not to accept the article for later publication, and if any revision is required. The final decision is made by the editors. Reviewers are provided with Sisyphus editors’ general review guidelines and a Peer Review Form (see english version here).

The reviewers will be chosen according to the article’s main theme and therefore will be experts on the paper’s research domain, trying, whenever possible and advisable, seek the collaboration of external and foreign scholars. In case of relevant discrepancies between the reviewers, the opinion of a third reviewer will be asked for. The final decision is made by the editors. Every year, a list of reviewers will be published.

The pre-review and peer review processes are entirely independent of each other.

Authors will be notified by email of the editors’ decision on the acceptance, request for revision or rejection of the article. The whole process (from submission to this first editors’ decision) shall take no more than six months.

Reviewers’ comments will be sent to the authors when and if reformulation of the article is needed. Authors will subsequently have a deadline to submit the final version of the article (as a rule, no more than one month).

Authors may track the article on the journal submission system, at any moment along the process, and must wait for the editorial decision before changing any data or submitted documents.


Review criteria
Sisyphus – Journal of Education only considers original articles for publication, explicitly on the strict condition that they have not yet been published, nor are they under consideration for publication elsewhere.

All submitted articles must be rigorous, technically precise, and should put forward a progressive perspective in relation to the state of the art. They should also elucidate and circumscribe the significance of the subject matter, as well as the conceptual and methodological orientations; the research enquiry; the revision of the correlative and most relevant publications on the subject; and the presentation of all results and conclusions. The manuscripts must be essentially problematical; that is, they should draw research vectors that open up new theoretical paths while suggesting methods to deal with intrinsic interrogations. They must also add new perspectives to current writings.

In order to be published, articles must focus on issues that can resonate with an international audience, which is why they should promote and be engaged in wide-ranging issues and debates that can be inscribed within a non-local and non-national agenda.

Articles to be evaluated may be submitted at any time. It should be noted that at least 50% of the articles published in each issue will be focused on research.

Articles should not have more than five authors. In case of co-authored works, the articles must be submitted with a full description of each author specific contribution to the scientific output [following CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) methodology].