Peer Review Prosess

JIPKL: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Kearifan Lokal follows a double-blind peer review policy. These papers are sent to multiple reviewers (experts in their respective fields) to review them according to the journal guidelines and feature quality research papers. For papers that require changes, the same reviewers will be used to ensure that the quality of the revised paper is acceptable.

JIPKL: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Kearifan Lokal maintains peer review standards while increasing process efficiency.

All research articles published in JIPKL: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Kearifan Lokal  underwent full peer review, the main characteristics of which are listed below:

  1. At least two qualified experts reviewed all research articles.
  2. The Editor-in-Chief makes all publication decisions of the journal based on the reviews provided
  3. Members of the international Editorial Board provide the Editor in Chief with insight, advice, and guidance in general and aid decision-making on specific submissions.
  4. Managing Editors and Editorial Assistants provide administrative support that enables journals to maintain the integrity of peer reviews while providing fast turnaround and maximum efficiency for authors, reviewers, and editors.
  5. Journals also benefit from referencing manuscripts from high-quality peer reviews conducted by established journals.

Peer reviews of referred papers:

JIPKL: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Kearifan Lokal Sciences Journal will immediately decide whether to accept, reject or request a revision of the referred paper based on reviews and editorial insights from supporting journals. In addition, the Editor will have the option to seek additional reviews when needed. Authors will be notified when the Editor decides further review is necessary.

 

Peer review of novel submissions:

Articles submitted directly to JIPKL: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan and Local Wisdom will be fully reviewed by at least two qualified experts in the field chosen by the Editor in Chief. The Chief Editor or a designated member of the Editorial Board will then decide whether to accept, reject, or request revisions based on the reviews and comments received.

The Editor will decide whether each submission reports on well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper. Priority assessment will not be a factor in decision-making, but all papers should make additional or new additions to the literature.