About the Journal
Focus and Scope
This journal publishes research articles on various innovative education that are interesting and have an impact on the development of education. The journal publishes articles on interdisciplinary content and cross-field dimensions related to education from various cultural perspectives.
The journal includes, but is not limited to the following fields:
- Education Method Innovation
- Education Technology Innovation
- Cultural History
- Cultural Studies Innovation
- Learning Innovation
- Training Innovation
- Teaching Innovation
Peer Review Process
The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated in the office, whether it is suitable for Jurnal Pendidikan Terapan (JUPITER) focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similiarity score by using Turnitin. The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Blind Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.
The suggested decision will be evaluated in an editorial board meeting. Afterwards, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author. Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. The review process will take approximately 4 to 12 weeks. Decisions categories include:
- Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to Jurnal Pendidikan Terapan (JUPITER).
- Resubmit for Review– The submission needs to be re-worked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. However, It will require a second round of review.
- Accept wtih Revisions - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in Jurnal Pendidikan Terapan (JUPITER) under the condition that minor/major modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
- Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.
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.
Section Policies
Articles
Open Submissions | Indexed | Peer Reviewed |
Editor
Open Submissions | Indexed | Peer Reviewed |
Publication Ethics
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
A policy of Screening for Plagiarism
All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Turnitin software