Publication Ethic and Malpractice Statement

Plagiarism Checker

EDUKASI is very strict in maintaining the authenticity of manuscripts. Each manuscript must be completely pure from acts of plagiarism, duplication, and fabrication. Each manuscript will be checked using a plagiarism checker or similarity check. Some plagiarism checkers include:

1. Plagiarism
2. Duplicity-Checker
3. Turnitin
4. Plagiarism Checker
5. Other tools of plagiarism

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of manuscripts in EDUKASI serves as a critical component in fostering a cohesive and respectful network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of work produced by authors, editors, and other relevant stakeholders. Peer-reviewed articles not only support but also embody the scientific method. Thus, it is imperative to establish standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing process, including authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the broader academic community, as outlined in COPE's core practices (https://publicationethics.org/core-practices).

As the publisher of EDUKASI, the Research and Development Center for Religious and Islamic Education under the Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia takes its guardianship responsibilities throughout the publication process seriously. We acknowledge our ethical obligations and other responsibilities. We are fully committed to publication ethics as delineated in COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Manuscript Flow

The flow of the manuscripts in EDUKASI was arranged in such a way as to guarantee the quality and contribution to intellectual enrichment in the field of religious education. Each manuscript will take a multilevel blind review process.

The first review was by the Chief in editor, to ensure that the manuscript is in accordance with the focus and scope of the EDUKASI journal. This took a maximum one week long.

If the article is in accordance with the scope of the EDUKASI, it will be processed into the Editor section, to further ensure that the substance and styles are fit and relevant. There are no many writing errors or technical errors outside the tolerance limits to be corrected. This took a maximum one week long.

The chief in editor and section editor can provide suggestions for substantive improvements.

Furthermore, the section editor will choose one or two Peer Reviewers who are experts in their fields to examine the substance of the content of the article. The peer-reviewers will examine and provide advice in accordance with their expertise, within a maximum of two weeks long.

The results of examination of Peer-reviewers and section editors will be returned to the author to be corrected. The author must send it back within the time determined by the section editor or chief in editor.

After the Author fixed, based on suggestions and input from editors and peer-reviewers, the manuscript is sent back to the EDUKASI. The section editor that is appropriate or first appointed, will check the betterment to ensure that all suggestions and input from editors and peer-reviewers have been considered, and there are no errors. If there are still many errors found, then the manuscript will be returned to the author for repair again. If an error can be received and corrected by the Editor, the process will go to the layout stage.

Before the manuscript is submitted to the layouter, it is first read by the proofreader, to minimize language and writing errors.

After the script is layout, it will be taken to the editor meeting. The meeting was attended by all members of the editorial team, and representatives of the Center for Research and Development of Religious Education. This meeting aims to select and decide which manuscript to be published on certain volumes and numbers.

Publication Timelines

Issue No.	Frequency	Published Month
1	Biannual	June (January-June)
2	Biannual	December (July-December)

Open Journal Sytem Editorial and Publishing Process

 

Publication decisions

The editor of EDUKASI is responsible for determining which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the submitted work and its significance to researchers and readers must always guide such decisions. Editors may follow the policies established by the journal's editorial board and are bound by legal requirements concerning issues like libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. They may consult with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions.

Fair play

An editor always evaluates manuscripts based on their intellectual content, irrespective of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff are prohibited from revealing any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as deemed appropriate

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Materials that have not been published and are disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be utilized in an editor's personal research without obtaining explicit written consent from the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

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.

Promptness

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.

Confidentiality

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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

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.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Step in Peer Review Process

The peer review process can be broadly described as follows:

No.	Step of Review Process	Estimated Time
1	Submission of paper	-
2	First internal review *	1-2 weeks
3	External review	3-4 weeks
4	The review reports are communicated to the authors for minor or major revisions. **	1 week
5	Submission of the revised paper	2-3 weeks
6	A second internal review is conducted to assess whether the suggestions provided by the reviewers have been satisfactorily incorporated. ***	1 week
7	The paper is accepted upon the successful submission of the revised version.	1 week

* The paper is returned to the authors if it does not meet the basic criteria.

** The paper is returned to the authors if external reviewers identify significant flaws that cannot be addressed through major revisions.

*** Authors are requested to make further revisions if the editors find that the reviewers' suggestions have not been adequately incorporated.

Note: Authors are kindly requested to carefully revise the paper in accordance with the suggestions provided by the reviewers to avoid any unnecessary delays in the review process.

Duties of Authors

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.

Originality and Plagiarism

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.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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.

Acknowledgment of Sources

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 of the Paper

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 on 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 other substantive conflicts 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.

 

Editorial/Advisory Board Members Position

he Editorial/Advisory Board members of EDUKASI are selected by the chief and section editors of the journal, with input from the leadership of the Center for Research of Religious Education. The Editorial/Advisory Board constitutes a team of experts in the field of EDUKASI. The tasks of the Advisory Board include:

• Undergoing a comprehensive revision every two years;
• Providing guidance to the editors on maintaining the good code of conduct in publications;
• Advising on journal policies, scope, focus, and other related issues to enhance the quality of publications.

Duties of Publisher

Publishers (printing) are partners of EDUKASI in supporting the manual socialization and publication of articles. The publisher (printing) may not disseminate the paper or manuscripts before obtaining approval from the EDUKASI Editors or the Center for Research and Development of Religious Education.

Duties of sociaty

Communities outside the Center for Research and Development of Religious Education, become users of the EDUKASI. The responsibility for building academic and educated communities through quality and dynamic reading in the field of religious education can be obtained through the journals. Therefore, it is expected for taking active participation in maintaining journal integrity. If there are things in academic misconducts, immediately contact the EDUKASI team via email: jurnaledukasikemenag@gmail.com 

html