Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

1. Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Pedagogi: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of the work of authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method.

It is therefore important to establish standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in scholarly publishing, including authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the academic community.

Actual Insight, as the publisher of this journal, takes its responsibility for safeguarding the integrity of all stages of publication seriously and recognizes its ethical and professional obligations.

The publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint revenue, and other commercial interests do not influence editorial decisions. Actual Insight and the Editorial Board of Pedagogi: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran will also facilitate communication with other journals and publishers whenever necessary to address scholarly publishing concerns.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The journal uses a double-blind review process. Reviewers advise the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions. The Editor-in-Chief communicates with authors as required and helps them improve the quality of their research papers.

3.2 Promptness

The journal editors are committed to providing timely reviews to authors. If a reviewer does not submit the review report within the expected timeframe, the manuscript may be assigned to another qualified reviewer.

3.3 Confidentiality

Manuscript content must be treated with the utmost confidentiality. The journal uses a double-blind review process. Except for authorized editorial communication managed by the Editor-in-Chief, editors and reviewers must not discuss submitted manuscripts with unauthorized individuals, including authors.

3.4 Standards of Objectivity

Editors and reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on their scholarly content. Review comments must be respectful, constructive, and academically justified. Reviewers are expected to provide clear explanations supporting their decisions and recommendations.

3.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument previously reported in the scholarly literature should be accompanied by an appropriate citation.

Reviewers should also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published works of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts when conflicts of interest arise from competitive, collaborative, professional, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the submitted work.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1 Reporting Standards

Authors should present an accurate account of the research performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying research data must be represented accurately in the manuscript.

Manuscripts should contain sufficient methodological detail and references to enable other researchers to replicate the work wherever possible. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors may be requested to provide raw research data associated with a manuscript for editorial evaluation. Authors should be prepared to provide such information within a reasonable timeframe.

4.3 Originality and Plagiarism

4.4 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

When submitting a manuscript for publication consideration, the corresponding author must confirm that the manuscript has not been published previously and is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal.

Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is considered unethical and is therefore unacceptable.

4.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the scholarly contributions of others is required. Authors must cite publications that have influenced or provided the foundation for their current research.

4.6 Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the research reported in the manuscript.

The corresponding author is responsible for keeping all co-authors informed throughout the review and editorial process. If the manuscript is accepted, all authors are required to provide a signed declaration confirming that the submitted work is their original research.

4.7 Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that present unusual or significant hazards, authors must clearly identify and describe these hazards in the manuscript.

4.8 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could reasonably influence the research findings or their interpretation.

All sources of financial support for the research project must also be disclosed.

4.9 Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement