Foreign Languages in Uzbekistan (FLEDU) follows a structured editorial and peer-review process designed to ensure the quality, originality, academic relevance, and ethical integrity of published manuscripts.
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening before peer review. Research articles that meet the journal's requirements are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.
1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.
The submission should comply with the journal's Aims and Scope, Author Guidelines, formatting requirements, and publication ethics standards.
2. Initial Technical Screening
Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial technical and editorial screening.
The screening includes:
- relevance to the journal's aims and scope;
- compliance with the required manuscript structure;
- IMRAD structure, where applicable;
- completeness of the abstract, keywords, references, and other required elements;
- formatting and technical requirements;
- plagiarism and text-similarity screening;
- screening for inappropriate or undeclared use of generative artificial intelligence, where applicable;
- completeness of submission metadata.
If substantial deficiencies are identified, the manuscript may be returned to the author for correction before it proceeds to editorial assessment.
Initial technical screening is not considered peer review.
3. Editorial Assessment
Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are assessed by an editor.
The editor determines:
- whether the manuscript falls within the journal's scope;
- the relevant academic field and subject area;
- the appropriate disciplinary expertise required for evaluation;
- whether the manuscript is suitable for peer review;
- appropriate independent reviewers.
Reviewers are selected according to their academic expertise and the subject of the manuscript. The journal covers areas including foreign-language education, linguistics, translation studies, literature and cultural studies, journalism, and related fields.
4. Peer Review
Research articles are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise.
The journal applies a double-anonymous peer-review process, whereby the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to each other during the review process.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts with regard to:
- originality and novelty;
- relevance and significance of the research;
- clarity of research objectives and questions;
- theoretical framework;
- methodology;
- validity and reliability of results;
- analysis and interpretation;
- adequacy and relevance of references;
- contribution to the relevant field;
- clarity and academic quality of presentation.
Reviewers provide written comments and a recommendation to the editor.
Possible recommendations include:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the responsible editor based on the reviewers' reports and the journal's editorial policies.
5. Revision
When revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the author together with the reviewers' comments.
Authors should revise the manuscript and provide a response explaining how the substantive comments have been addressed.
A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when considered necessary by the editor.
The manuscript may undergo more than one round of review and revision.
6. Editorial Decision
Following peer review and, where applicable, revision, the responsible editor makes the final decision.
The possible decisions are:
Accept — the manuscript proceeds to editorial preparation.
Revision — the manuscript is returned to the author for further revision.
Reject — the manuscript does not proceed to publication.
The decision is based on the reviewers' evaluations, the academic quality of the manuscript, its relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with the journal's publication and ethical requirements.
7. Copyediting and Editorial Preparation
After acceptance, the manuscript enters the copyediting and editorial preparation stage.
At this stage, the editorial team:
- prepares the manuscript according to the journal's publication template;
- checks the structure and headings;
- checks tables and figures;
- checks references and citations;
- verifies bibliographic information;
- checks article metadata;
- assigns the appropriate subject category;
- prepares the final manuscript for production.
Copyediting does not constitute a new peer-review process. Its purpose is to prepare an accepted manuscript for publication.
8. Production and Final Verification
The accepted manuscript is transferred to the production stage.
The production team:
- prepares the final layout;
- generates the publication PDF;
- checks the final version;
- verifies article metadata;
- checks authors and affiliations;
- verifies volume, issue, year, and page information;
- prepares the article for publication in the journal's online publishing system.
9. DOI and Metadata
Before publication, the article's bibliographic metadata are checked.
Where applicable, the article receives a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), and the corresponding metadata are registered with Crossref.
The DOI and article metadata are checked before the article is published.
10. Publication
After completion of the editorial, peer-review, copyediting, production, and metadata procedures, the article is published through the journal's online platform.
Published articles are openly accessible and receive a permanent article URL and, where applicable, a registered DOI.
Editorial and Peer-Review Workflow
Submission → Technical Screening → Editorial Assessment → Peer Review → Revision (if required) → Editorial Decision → Copyediting → Production → DOI & Metadata Verification → Publication
If a manuscript requires corrections during the initial screening, it is returned to the author before proceeding. If revisions are required after peer review, the revised manuscript may undergo further evaluation by the reviewers.
Review Principles
The journal is committed to:
- independent scholarly evaluation;
- confidentiality of the review process;
- appropriate reviewer expertise;
- transparency of editorial decisions;
- protection against conflicts of interest;
- academic integrity and originality;
- fair and consistent treatment of submitted manuscripts.
Reviewers are expected to declare any potential conflict of interest and to maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and review materials.
Note: The journal may use plagiarism-detection, text-similarity, and other screening tools as part of the editorial process. Results generated by automated tools are considered by the editorial team together with other available evidence and are not, by themselves, treated as a substitute for editorial judgment.