Spry Contemporary Educational Practices (SCEP) serves as a platform for dynamic discourse on cutting-edge research and policy developments in contemporary education. It delves into the evolving landscape of teaching and learning across diverse educational sectors, exploring the inherent nature and intricate processes of education and training.
We begin our journey with a deep sense of purpose, based on several key reasons: The educational landscape is changing faster than ever before. Technological advances, changes in pedagogy, and the imperative of lifelong learning have brought a new era to the classroom. Spry Contemporary Educational Practices (SCEP) strives to capture this dynamic and help educators adapt and succeed. We understand that educators around the world are inventing new ways to teach and learn. Spry Contemporary Educational Practices (SCEP) aims to be a driving force for sharing best practices, motivating educators to innovate, and building a worldwide community of educators dedicated to excellence. Education is a multidisciplinary realm, and Spry Contemporary Educational Practices (SCEP) welcomes theory, policy and practice on a wide range of topics that represent interdisciplinary, cross-disciplinary and transdisciplinary interests on international and global scales that help us better understand educational practices and their wider societal impacts.
Our readership comprises a distinguished community of educators, esteemed researchers, and influential policymakers, who share a commitment to advance education and contribute to informed discussions that shape the future of learning.

Guidelines for Ethical Publication

Ethics in Publishing

As stewards of scholarly journals, we are dedicated to upholding the highest ethical standards in every facet of our operations. We are unwavering in our commitment to safeguarding the credibility of the research we publish, as well as the privacy and confidentiality of our authors, reviewers, and readers. In pursuit of these ideals, we pledge to adhere to the following ethical principles

Types of Peer Review:

  1. Single-Blind Check:

    Description: In a single-blind review, the author is blind to the identity of the reviewers, while the reviewers are aware of the author.

    Policy: To guarantee unbiased assessments, the journal follows a single-blind review procedure in which reviewers are informed of the author's name to avoid biases but the author remains anonymous.

    Process: Reviewers carry out evaluations in a confidential manner by withholding their identity from the writers. Double-Blind Check.

  2. Open Peer Review:

    Description: To improve accountability and transparency, open peer review entails disclosing the identities of both authors and reviewers at each stage of the review procedure.

    Policy: To promote accountability and transparency, the journal permits an open peer review system in which the names of the reviewers and authors are revealed at any point throughout the review process.

    Methodology: Open attribution of reviews and comments ensures a transparent evaluation process.

  3. Post-Publication Peer Review:

    Description: Post-publication peer review is the process of evaluating academic work after it has been released, enabling continuous evaluations and conversations.

    Policy: To improve the rigor and caliber of published work, the journal encourages continuous evaluations and debates through post-publication peer review.

    Process: The journal accepts further reviews and criticisms from the scientific community following publication, enabling ongoing assessment and discussion.These policies demonstrate the diverse approaches journals can take in ensuring the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. Journals may choose one specific method or a combination thereof, depending on their editorial preferences and goals for maintaining rigorous standards in academic publishing.

Equal Authorship

Ensure originality and provide proper citations for external sources. We insist that all authors of submitted research meet the authorship criteria defined by international guidelines. We also mandate that authors disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may impact their research

HEC Policy Compliance:

Our journal strictly adheres to the Higher Education Commission (HEC) policy regarding plagiarism. As per HEC guidelines, the similarity index in any submitted manuscript should not exceed 19%. Authors are responsible for ensuring their work complies with this requirement. Manuscripts found to exceed the specified similarity index will be subject to further scrutiny and possible rejection or revision as deemed necessary by the editorial board.


Notify the publisher or journal editor of any errors in published research. We acknowledge that errors and mistakes can occur in research, and we are committed to correcting them promptly and transparently. If errors or mistakes are discovered after publication, we will issue corrections or retractions as appropriate.