Submission, Initial Assessment and Peer Review
Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan has a fully web-based system for the submission and review of manuscripts. Submissions should be prepared in accordance with the Author Guidelines and uploaded to https://publikasi.abidan.org/index.php/educative/user/register. Manuscripts may be returned to authors without a scientific assessment if they do not meet all submission requirements, if they are not in the correct format, or cannot be downloaded reliably.
Submissions must represent the original and independent work of the authors. Each new submission is assessed by one or more editors to determine whether it falls within the general remit of Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan. We will reject a manuscript without review if it contains insufficient educational content; does not have clear application to education; is mainly concerned with developing and advancing methodology and not primarily with the application of these methods to education; there are substantive issues with the design, methodology, or data quality; it exceeds our word limit or is incorrectly formatted; it is poorly presented and unclear.
Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are assigned to a subject expert in our team of Associate Editors to oversee the review process. All papers are subject to peer review and authors can expect a decision, or an explanation for the delay, within a month of receipt. If a revision is invited, the corresponding author should submit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks. The final decision is taken by one of the senior editors based on the information gained through the peer review process.
Types of decisions: Decline, Resubmit, Revision, Accept
Following peer review, the paper is judged not to be acceptable for publication in Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan and resubmission is not possible.
The submitted version of the paper is not acceptable and requires major revision but there is clear potential in the work and Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan is prepared to consider a new version. Authors are offered the opportunity to resubmit their paper as a new submission. Concerns will remain regarding the suitability of the paper for publication until the editors are convinced by the authors that their paper fits the scope and standards of Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan. The resubmitted manuscript will be returned to the original associate editor if at all possible.
The paper requires changes before a final decision can be made. Authors are asked to modify their manuscript in light of comments received from referees and editors, and to submit a new version for consideration within 2 weeks of receiving the decision letter. A point-by-point explanation of how comments have been addressed must be supplied with the revised version of the paper. Revisions may undergo further peer review and papers may undergo more than one round of revision. If the authors do not revise their papers to the satisfaction of the editors, the paper can still be declined from publication in Educative: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan.
The paper is acceptable for publication, subject to conditions that need to be addressed in producing a final version of the manuscript. These may include sub-editing changes and a minor amendments to ensure the paper fully matches our criteria. After final checking in the editorial office, acceptance is confirmed and the paper is forwarded to the publishers for publication.
This is your opportunity to attract the reader’s attention. Remember that readers are the potential authors who will cite your article. Identify the main issue of the paper within the title. Begin with the subject or highlight the idea of the paper. The title should be accurate, unambiguous, specific, and complete. Do not contain infrequently-used abbreviations. The title of the paper should be in 16 pt bold Century Schoolbook and be centered. The title should have 0 pts space above and 12 pts below.
Authors Name and Affiliations
Write Author(s) names without a title and professional positions, such as: Prof, Dr, Production Manager, etc. Do not abbreviate your last/family name. Always give your First and Last names (should be at least 2 (two) words). The Middle Name is optional.
Write a clear affiliation of all Authors. Affiliation includes the name of department/unit, (faculty), the name of university, address, country. Please indicate Corresponding Author (include email address) by adding an asterisk (*) in superscript behind the name.
As per Educative Group policy, no author list changes are permitted after acceptance of an article. The Educative production team is instructed to enforce this policy during the production/proofing process. Authors should consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript. The definitive list of authors should be provided at the time of the initial submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only BEFORE the acceptance of the manuscript and only if approved by the journal Editor. To request such a change, the Editor must receive the following from the authors: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed. The Editor retains the right to determine whether the addition or deletion of authors should be performed or not. The addition of deletion of author names in proofs is strictly prohibited. Please be noted that only one author is allowed to be a Corresponding Author of an article which is indicated by an asterisk (*) symbol.
The Corresponding Author may different from the Submitting Author. The Submitting Author may submit the manuscript on behalf of the Corresponding Author. However, other Authors may include their email addresses in addition to an email of corresponding authors. The Corresponding Author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process. Generally, Corresponding Authors are senior researchers or group leaders with some – or a lot of experience – in the submission and publishing process of scientific research. They are someone who has not only contributed to the paper significantly but also has the ability to ensure that it goes through the publication process smoothly and successfully.
Abstract and Keywords
An abstract should stand alone, which means that no citation and figures and equation format in the abstract. Consider it the advertisement for your article. The abstract should tell the prospective reader what you did and highlight the key findings. Avoid using technical jargon and uncommon abbreviations. You must be accurate, brief, clear and specific. Use words that reflect the precise meaning. The abstract should be precise and honest. Please follow the word limitations (100‐150 words). The abstract must contain: backgrounds (if any, maximum 2-3 sentences), short clear objectives, short methods, final results or findings, and conclusion. Keywords are the labels of your manuscript and critical to correct indexing and searching. Therefore the keywords should represent the content and highlight of your article. Use only those abbreviations that are firmly established in the field. e.g. DNA. Each word/phrase in keyword should be separated by a semicolon (;), not a comma (,).
In the Introduction, Authors should state the objectives of the work at the end of the introduction section. Before the objective, Authors should provide an adequate background (maximum 1 paragraph), and very short literatures survey/review in order to record the existing solutions/method, to show which is the best of previous researches, to show the main limitation of the previous researches, to show what do you hope to achieve (to solve the limitation), and to show the scientific merit or novelties of the paper. Avoid a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results.
Do not describe pieces of literature survey/review as author by author, but should be presented as group per method or topic reviewed which refers to some literatures. Before the objectives and after the literatures review, author must state the gap analysis or novelties statements to show why does this paper is important and what is unique idea of this paper compared to other previous researchers' suggestions.
One of the examples of novelty statement or the gap analysis statement in the end of Introduction section (after state of the art of previous research survey): “........ (short summary of background)....... .....(put here state of the art or overview of previous researches similar to this research).............. A few researchers focused on ....... There have been limited studies concerned on ........ Therefore, this research intends to ................. The objectives of this research are .........”. or “........ (short summary of background)....... .....(put here state of the art or overview of previous researches similar to this research).............. A few researchers focused on ....... There is no researcher concerned on ........ Therefore, this research focuses on ................. Therefore, this research is aimed to .........”. etc.
Materials and Methods
Methods, In general, should contain 4 main aspects, namely the types, approaches, and brief procedures of research used; research subjects/participants; data collection methods & instruments; and data analysis methods. On methodologies avoid writing conceptual (e.g. interviews are... quantitative is... DST.) Illustrate the research design with a chart or drawing.
Results and Discussion
The results should be clear and concise. The results should summarize (scientific) findings rather than providing data in great detail. Please highlight the differences between your results or findings and the previous publications by other researchers.
The discussion should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature. In the discussion, it is the most important section of your article. Here you get the chance to sell your data. Make the discussion corresponding to the results, but do not reiterate the results. Often should begin with a brief summary of the main scientific findings (not experimental results). The following important items should be covered in discussion: How do your results relate to the original question or objectives outlined in the Introduction section? What is your finding of research? (what/how)? Do you provide interpretation scientifically for each of your results or findings presented? This scientific interpretation must be supported by valid analysis and characterization (why)? Are your results consistent with what other investigators have reported (what else)? Or are there any differences? Comparison your results with other researcher results is mandatory required.
Conclusions should only answer the objectives of the research. Tells how your work advances the field from the present state of knowledge. Without clear Conclusions, reviewers and readers will find it difficult to judge the work, and whether or not it merits publication in the journal. Do not repeat the Abstract, or just list experimental results. Provide a clear scientific justification for your work, and indicate possible applications and extensions. This conclusion should be provided as a paragraph. You should also suggest future experiments and/or point out those that are underway.
Recognize those who helped in the research, especially funding source supporter (Funder of Research) of your research financially. If required, include individuals who have assisted you in your study: Advisors, Financial supporters, or may another supporter, i.e. Proofreaders, Typists, and Suppliers, who may have given materials. Do not acknowledge one of the authors' names.
Citation and References
Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. Cite only items that you have read. Do not inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid excessive self‐citations. Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region. Check each reference against the original source (authors name, volume, issue, year, Digital Object Identification (DOI) Number). DOI Number information must be provided (if available). It is suggested to use Mendeley Desktop Reference Manager Applications with APA 7th Style. NOTE: The minimum number of references should be 25 references, to make sure the adequacy of literatures cited.