Peer Review

Peer Review Process

Journal of Education and Science (JUPISI)

The Journal of Education and Science (JUPISI) is committed to maintaining high academic standards through a rigorous double-blind peer review process. This process ensures the quality, integrity, and credibility of the scientific work we publish. All submitted manuscripts are reviewed objectively, fairly, and confidentially.

1. Initial Screening

After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the editorial team to assess its relevance to the journal's scope, adherence to formatting guidelines, and compliance with ethical standards. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be rejected without peer review or returned to the authors for revision.

2. Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using reliable plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 25% will be rejected or returned for correction. Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their submissions.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to two independent reviewers for evaluation. JUPISI implements a double-blind review process, meaning:

  • The reviewers do not know the identities of the authors.
  • The authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.

This process ensures impartiality and prevents any potential biases during the review.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the following criteria:

  • Originality: The novelty and contribution of the research to the field of education and science.
  • Relevance: The alignment of the manuscript with the journal’s focus and current academic discussions.
  • Scientific Rigor: The soundness of the research design, methodology, and data analysis.
  • Clarity: The logical structure, coherence of arguments, and clarity of writing.
  • References: The use of relevant and up-to-date scholarly sources.

Reviewers provide detailed feedback, including suggestions for improvement. They may recommend:

  • Accept without revisions
  • Minor revisions required
  • Major revisions required
  • Reject

5. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding the manuscript. The possible decisions include:

  • Accepted: The manuscript is ready for publication with or without minor revisions.
  • Revision Required: The manuscript requires major or minor revisions before acceptance.
  • Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards for publication.

In cases where reviewers provide conflicting feedback, the editor may assign an additional reviewer or make a decision based on the strengths of the arguments presented.

6. Revision Process

If revisions are required, authors will receive detailed reviewer comments and are expected to:

  • Revise the manuscript accordingly.
  • Submit a response letter explaining how each comment was addressed.
  • Highlight the changes made in the revised manuscript for easy reference.

Failure to respond adequately to reviewer feedback may result in rejection.

7. Final Evaluation and Acceptance

After receiving the revised manuscript, the editorial team will conduct a final evaluation. In some cases, the manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for a second review (especially if major revisions were requested).

Once the manuscript meets all academic and editorial standards, it will be accepted for publication. Minor formatting or language adjustments may be made by the editorial team to ensure consistency with the journal’s style.

8. Confidentiality and Ethical Considerations

JUPISI maintains strict confidentiality throughout the peer review process. Reviewers are expected to:

  • Treat manuscripts as confidential documents.
  • Avoid using any information from the manuscript for personal gain.
  • Disclose any potential conflict of interest that may influence their judgment.

The journal follows the ethical guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to handle any cases of academic misconduct, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices.

9. Appeals Process

Authors who disagree with the editorial decision may submit an appeal by providing a clear, well-reasoned justification. The appeal will be reviewed by the editorial board, and if necessary, an independent reviewer may be assigned. The decision after the appeal is final.

For further information regarding the peer review process, please contact the editorial team at lppm@untara.ac.id or visit our website at JUPISI.

Editorial Team
Journal of Education and Science (JUPISI)