Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan (JIP) is a scientific journal that contains and disseminate the results of research, in-depth study, and the ideas or innovative work in the field of science education. The innovative work of the post graduate students, teachers and lecturers of the development of the education sector which is able to make a positive contribution to the schools and educational institutions the focus of this journal.

 

Section Policies

Front Matter

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Back Matter

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Firstly, the editor uses a plagiarism checker and also indexing machines to check whether there are any plagiarism activity happened during the writing process and product. If any plagiarism found, the proposed article will be rejected. Each published article has been reviewed and suggested to be published by at least two reviewers. The reviewing process is single blind review.

 

Publication Frequency

This journal is published biannually (June and December)

 

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.

 

Archiving

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...

 

Publication Ethics

JOURNAL PUBLISHER CODE ETHICS

  • Determining the name of the journal, the scope of science, the timeline, and the accreditation.
  • Determining the membership of the editorial board.
  • Defining the relationship between publishers, editors, peer review and other parties in the contract.
  • Appreciating the confidentiality of the contributing researchers, author, editor, and peer review.
  • Applying the norms and regulations regarding intellectual property rights especially on the copyrights.
  • Conducting the policy reviews on the journals and present it to the authors, editorial board, peer review, and readers.
  • Making the behavior code guidelines for editor and peer review.
  • Publishing journals on a regular basis.
  • Ensuring the availability of resources for sustainability journal publishing.
  • Establishing cooperation and marketing network.
  • Preparing for the licensing and other legal aspects.

EDITOR CODE ETHICS

  • Improving the quality of publications.
  • Ensuring the process to maintain the quality of published papers.
  • Leading the freedom in delivering opinion.
  • Maintaining the integrity of the author's academic track record.
  • Conveying corrections, clarifications, withdrawal, and an apology if necessary.
  • Owning the responsibility for styling and formatting the paper, while the contents and any statements in the paper are the responsibility of the authors.       
  • Assessing policies and attitudes of the published journal from the author and peer review to increase responsibility and minimize errors.
  • Having an open minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who is different than their personal opinion.
  • Prohibiting in defending our own opinion, the author or third parties which may result in a false decision.
  • Encouraging the author, in order to make improvements to the paper until it worth to publish.

PEER REVIEW CODE ETHIC

  • Receiving the task from the editors to review the papers and submit the review to the editor, as a matter of determining the feasibility of the paper for publication.
  • Reviewing the papers in a timely manner (on time) in accordance with the style guide based on scientific principles (method of data collection, the legality of the author, conclusions, etc.).
  • Reviewing the papers that have been corrected in accordance with the standards.
  • Encouraging the author to make improvements in the papers by providing feedback, suggestions, feedback, and recommendations.
  • Maintaining the author privacy by covering the results of the corrections, suggestions, and recommendations received by the author.
  • Reviewers must not review any papers who involve the reviewers in its work, directly or indirectly.
  • Following the guidelines for peer review in reviewing papers and assessing the evaluation form paper given by the editors.
  • Reviewing papers substantively by not correcting the grammar, punctuation and mistype.
  • Ensuring the principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritize the benefit of the paper for the development of science, technology, and innovation; also comprehending the impact on the development of science writing.
  • Prohibiting in defending own opinion, the author or third parties which may result on decision reference becoming non-objective.                                       
  • Upholding the value of the objectivity and free from any influences.
  • Ensuring the confidentiality of findings in the paper until it is published.
  • Having broad understanding on the expertise and able to provide a review of the paper appropriately and correctly.
  • Refusing to do review if the research is not from the field of expertise. Instead, the peer review should be giving recommendation to the researcher if there is any other expert on the subjects.
  • Having an open minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who is different than their personal opinion.
  • Refusing to do the review if the deadline given by the editor cannot be reached. If absent the peer review should notify the editor as early as possible.  
  • The results of the review must be presented in an honest, objective, and supported by clear arguments. Some possible recommendations from the review are:
    1) Accepted without repair
    2) Accepted with minor repairs (after repaired by the author, it is not necessary to go to peer review)
    3) Accepted with major repairs (after repaired by the author, return to the peer review for re-review)
    4) Rejected and recommended for other publication
    5) Rejected and recommended not to publish to any publication because scientifically the paper is flawed for the community.
  • Giving rejection for the last recommendation as the last choice related to the feasibility of the papers or with indication of severe violations of the code of ethics related to the author.
  • Reviewed papers aren’t allowed to be used for personal or third party interests. Moreover, The use of some of the contents of the reviewed papers must have received permission from the author.

AUTHOR/ARTICLE WRITER CODE ETHICS

  • Author collectively responsible for the work and the content of the article which cover methods, analysis, calculation, and its details.
  • Author immediately responds to the comments made by the peer review professionally and timely.
  • Author should inform the editor if they retract their paper.
  • The author describes the limitations in the study.     
  • Author respects the publishers if they demand to not to publish the findings in the form of interviews or through any other media before the publication.
  • The author informs the editor of (a) paper that is part of a phased research, multidisciplinary, and different perspectives.
  • The author makes a statement that the papers submitted for publication is original, has not been published anywhere in any language, and not in the process of submission to another publisher.
  • If there is any error in the paper, the author should immediately notify the editor or publisher.               
  • The use of materials from other publications which is copyrighted, should be given a written permission and gratitude.
  • The author refers to the work of others as appropriate in citations and quotations which used in the paper.
  • When delivering new discoveries or improving inventions the authors should mention the job previous researcher/writer/founder.                        
  • The author is not allowed to give a bibliography of the publications if they do not read the publication. 
  • If requested, the authors prepared the proof that the research has already met the requirements of the research ethics including the field notes.
  • Author adequately responds if there are any comments or feedback after the paper published.

 

Plagiarism Policy

PLAGIARISM INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO:

  • Refer and/or quoting terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing sources in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
  • Refer and/or quoting random terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing a source in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
  • Using a source of ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
  • Formulate the words and/or sentences themselves from the source of words and/or phrases, ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
  • Submit a scientific papers produced and/or published by others as a source of scientific work without express adequately.

PREVENTION

In every article submitted to the Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan must be attached to a statement signed by the author that:

  • The article is free of plagiarism;
  • If at a later proved there is plagiarism in the article, the author is willing to accept the sanctions in accordance with the legislation.

SANCTIONS

  • Reprimand;
  • Letter of warning;
  • Revocation of the article;
  • Cancellation of publication.

 

Retraction

The papers published in Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

 

References Management

Every article accepted by Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan use references management software. eg Mendeley or zotero

 

Correction and Retraction Policies

Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan is committed to upholding the integrity of the literature and publishes Errata, Expressions of Concerns or Retraction Notices dependent on the situation and in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines. More information about the publication of ethics International Journal of Advances in Intelligent Informatics can be found on Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement and information about COPE retraction guidelines can be accessed at Retraction page.

 

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

Manuscript withdrawal is strongly discouraged. It is a waste of valuable resources that the publisher put. If the author still requests withdrawal of their manuscript, the following guidelines have to be followed

  • Manuscript withdrawal will be permitted only for the most compelling and unavoidable reasons. It is unacceptable to withdraw a manuscript from a journal because another journal is accepting it;
  • The author should submit a request to the editorial office as a letter signed by all authors stating the complete cause that led to the step of manuscript withdrawal;
  • Authors must not assume that their manuscript has been withdrawn until they have received appropriate notification to this effect from the editorial office.

 

Posting Your Article Policy

Understand Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan article sharing and posting policies for each stage of the article life cycle.

Prior to submission to Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan
Authors may post their article anywhere at any time, including on preprint servers such as arXiv.org. This does not count as a prior publication.

Upon submission to Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan
Authors may share or post their submitted version of the article (also known as the preprint) in the following ways:

  1. On the author’s personal website or their employer’s website
  2. On institutional or funder websites if required
  3. In the author’s own classroom use
  4. On Scholarly Collaboration Networks (SCNs) that are signatories to the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers’ Sharing Principles (https://www.stm-assoc.org/stm-consultations/scn-consultation-2015/)
The following text should be included on the first page of the submitted article when it first is posted in any of the above outlets: “This work has been submitted to Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan for possible publication".

Upon acceptance to Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan
If an author previously posted their submitted version of the article in any of the following locations, he or she will need to replace the submitted version with the accepted version of Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan. No other changes may be made to the accepted article.
  1. Author’s personal website
  2. Author’s employer’s website
  3. arXiv.org
  4. Funder’s repository*
Final published article
  1. When the article is published, the posted version should be updated with a full citation to the original of Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, including DOI. He or she will need to replace the accepted version with the published article version of Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan.
  2. The article will be followed statements on the Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan copyright notice.



https://www.gojosatoru.love/