Peer Review Process

JP (Jurnal Pendidikan): Teori dan Praktik implements a blind peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance of published manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts undergo editorial screening and, when considered suitable, are evaluated by at least two reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

The peer-review process is conducted in accordance with the principles of academic integrity, confidentiality, impartiality, and editorial independence.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are initially assessed by the editorial team to determine their suitability for the journal. This assessment considers the manuscript's relevance to the journal's aims and scope, originality, clarity, scholarly contribution, methodological appropriateness, and compliance with author guidelines and publication ethics.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's minimum requirements may be returned to the authors for technical corrections or rejected without proceeding to external peer review.

As part of the initial assessment, manuscripts are screened for potential plagiarism using Turnitin. Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team, taking into account the nature and context of any identified textual overlap.

2. Reviewer Selection and Evaluation

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a minimum of two qualified reviewers with relevant academic expertise.

The journal applies a blind peer-review process to support objectivity and fairness in manuscript evaluation. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, disclose potential conflicts of interest, and provide constructive assessments based on scholarly considerations.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to the following criteria:

  • Originality and significance of the research.

  • Relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

  • Clarity of research objectives and theoretical framework.

  • Appropriateness and rigor of research methods.

  • Accuracy and quality of data analysis and interpretation.

  • Coherence of the discussion and conclusions.

  • Contribution to educational theory, policy, or practice.

  • Compliance with ethical standards and academic writing conventions.

Reviewers provide recommendations to assist the editor in reaching an informed publication decision.

3. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' evaluations and the editorial assessment, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

Accepted: The manuscript meets the journal's publication requirements and requires no substantive revision.

Minor Revision: The manuscript is potentially suitable for publication but requires limited improvements.

Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions before further consideration.

Rejected: The manuscript does not sufficiently meet the journal's academic, methodological, or editorial standards.

Reviewers provide recommendations, while the final decision regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection rests with the responsible editor.

4. Manuscript Revision

Authors are informed of editorial decisions and relevant reviewer comments through the journal's editorial communication process.

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' and editor's comments carefully and provide a clear explanation of the changes made.

Authors are given a maximum of eight weeks from the date of the revision notification to submit a revised manuscript, unless otherwise determined by the editorial team.

Revised manuscripts may undergo further evaluation by the original reviewers or other qualified reviewers when necessary.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not automatically guarantee acceptance for publication.

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities

Editors and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential academic documents. Unpublished information obtained during the editorial or review process must not be disclosed or used for personal advantage.

Reviewers must provide objective, respectful, and evidence-based assessments. Any potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed to the editorial team.

Concerns regarding plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, or other forms of research misconduct will be addressed in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

The use of artificial intelligence tools during editorial evaluation and peer review must comply with the journal's Artificial Intelligence Policy, particularly regarding confidentiality, transparency, and human responsibility.

6. Editorial Independence

The journal maintains editorial independence throughout manuscript evaluation and publication.

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's academic scope.

The journal's peer-review practices are informed by internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including guidance provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Information regarding publication charges, copyright, and open-access licensing is provided separately through the journal's Author Fee, Copyright Notice, and Open Access policies.