Peer Review Process

The Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science (IJoTIS) operates a double-blind peer review process: the identities of the authors and the reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review. Every manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

Stages of Review

  1. Submission and administrative check. The editorial office verifies that the manuscript follows the author guidelines, uses the journal template, and is properly anonymised. Incomplete submissions are returned to the author.
  2. Similarity screening. The manuscript is checked with Turnitin. A similarity score above 20% (excluding references) results in return or rejection.
  3. Desk review. The Editor-in-Chief and Section Editor assess the fit with the aims and scope, the novelty, the soundness of the method, and the quality of the writing. A manuscript may be desk rejected at this stage without external review.
  4. Peer review. The manuscript is assigned to at least two reviewers, who assess it against the journal's review form and recommend a decision. Reviewers are given four weeks to respond to a review invitation.
  5. Editorial decision. The Editor-in-Chief takes the reviewers' recommendations into account and issues one of the decisions below. Where the reviewers disagree substantially, a third reviewer is invited.
  6. Revision. The authors revise the manuscript and submit a point-by-point response to every reviewer comment. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers.
  7. Final decision, copyediting, and production. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, proofreading by the authors, DOI registration, and publication.

Editorial Decisions

  • Accept submission - publishable as it stands.
  • Revisions required - minor revisions; re-review by the editor only.
  • Resubmit for review - major revisions; a further round of peer review is required.
  • Decline submission - not publishable in IJoTIS.

Indicative Timeline

The overall time from submission to a first decision depends on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript. As a guide, reviewers are given four weeks to respond to a review invitation once assigned. Authors are kept informed of the status of their submission through the journal website at every stage.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Reviewers must decline an invitation where a conflict of interest exists or where they lack the relevant expertise.
  • Reviewed manuscripts are confidential documents. They must not be shared, cited, or used for personal advantage, and must not be uploaded to generative AI tools.
  • Reviews must be objective, constructive, and supported by argument. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited, and alert the editor to any substantial overlap with other publications.