Peer Review Process

Jurnal Pendidikan Anak (p-ISSN: 2302-6804, e-ISSN: 2579-4531) enforces rigorous peer-review standards to ensure the highest scientific quality, novelty, and academic integrity of every published manuscript.

1. Peer Review Policy 

Key Principles:

  • Reviewer Anonymity: Reviewer identities are strictly withheld from authors throughout and after the evaluation process.
  • Neutrality: Editors ensure all document metadata is cleared so decisions are made purely on scientific merit.

2. Step-by-Step Peer Review Workflow

Stage 1: Initial Desk Evaluation

  • Manuscripts are screened by the Editorial Team for focus, scope, formatting compliance, and structural completeness.
  • Plagiarism and text duplication screening is conducted using Turnitin (maximum tolerated similarity index is 15%).
  • Manuscripts failing to meet basic benchmarks will face immediate Desk Rejection. Expected turnaround: 3–7 working days.

Stage 2: Independent Peer Review

  • Qualifying manuscripts are assigned to at least two (2) independent expert reviewers with matching subject expertise.
  • Reviewers evaluate methodology, theoretical grounding, empirical evidence, analysis depth, and citation freshness (at least 80% primary journal articles from the last 10 years).
  • Standard review timeframe: 2–4 weeks.

Stage 3: Editorial Decision

Based on peer reviewers' detailed reports, the Handling Editor renders one of the following official decisions:

  • Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted as-is and forwarded to copyediting.
  • Minor Revisions: The author is required to submit minor revisions within 7–14 days.
  • Major Revisions (Resubmit for Review): The author must perform substantial revisions within 14–21 days, followed by a second review round.
  • Decline Submission: The submission does not satisfy scientific standards or falls outside the journal scope.

Stage 4: Copyediting, Proofreading & Production

  • Accepted manuscripts undergo language refinement, layout typesetting, and final PDF proofreading before official online dissemination.

3. Manuscript Evaluation Indicators

Reviewers score and provide detailed qualitative feedback across the following core dimensions:

  • Title & Abstract: Concise problem statement, sound method summary, key findings, and representative keywords.
  • Introduction: Clear background urgency, literature gap analysis, and explicit research questions / novelty.
  • Research Methodology: Methodological rigor, sample/participant adequacy, instrumentation validity, and procedural clarity.
  • Results & Discussion: Analytical depth, theoretical integration, contextual interpretation, and critical dialogue with existing studies.
  • Conclusion & References: Relevant conclusions tied to research aims, practical implications for early childhood, and accurate adherence to APA Style 7th Edition.

4. Reviewer Ethics & Integrity

  • Privileged Confidentiality: Submitted manuscripts remain privileged academic materials and must never be shared, cited, or utilized prior to publication.
  • Disclosure of Conflicts: Reviewers must immediately decline evaluations if financial, personal, or institutional conflicts of interest exist.
  • Constructive & Professional Tone: Feedback must remain polite, scientifically grounded, objective, and aimed at elevating the scholarly value of the work.