About the Journal
- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process
- Open Access Policy
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
- Abstracting & Indexing
- Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
- Policy on the use of GenAI
- Author Guidelines
- Publication Frequency
- Copyright Notice
- Author Fees
Focus and Scope
Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda) is a scholarly platform for empirical and conceptual research in the field of primary education. It provides opportunities for researchers, academics, and practitioners to publish their scientific papers, research articles, and conceptual studies. The journal welcomes a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods and approaches to explore the complexities of education at the primary school level.
JPPGuseda focuses on a comprehensive range of topics within primary education, including, but not limited to:
- Action Research: Studies on systematic inquiry conducted by teachers to improve their own practices in the classroom.
- Quantitative Research: Correlational and comparative studies that analyze relationships between variables and differences between groups in primary education settings.
- Program Implementation and Evaluation: Research that assesses the effectiveness and impact of educational programs and policies in primary schools.
- Teacher Professional Development: Investigations into the training, development, and ongoing learning of primary school teachers.
- Learning and Instruction: Research on pedagogical strategies, teaching methodologies, and learning processes specific to primary school students.
- Educational Management and Policy: Studies on the administration, policies, and management systems that affect primary education.
Section Policies
Articles
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated in the office, whether it is suitable for Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda) focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similiarity score by using Turnitin. The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Double Blind Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.
The suggested decision will be evaluated in an editorial board meeting. Afterwards, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author. Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. The review process will take approximately 4 to 12 weeks. Decisions categories include:
- Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda).
- Resubmit for Review The submission needs to be re-worked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. However, It will require a second round of review.
- Accept wtih Revisions - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda) under the condition that minor/major modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
- Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement are based on COPEs Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. As such, this journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.
A selection of key points is included below, but you should always refer to the three documents listed above for full details.
Duties of Editors
Fair play and editorial independence
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit {importance, originality, studys validity, clarity} and its relevance to the journals scope, without regard to the authors race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Publication decisions
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
Editors {in conjunction with the publisher and/or society} will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. AP-SMART editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour. AP-SMART shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Promptness
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief {who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances}. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript {published or unpublished} of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewers own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewers personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication {preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre}, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper {without attribution}, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.
The publication of some kinds of articles {such as clinical guidelines, translations} in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Authorship of the manuscript
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: {i} made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and {ii} drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and {iii} have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript {such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support} but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors {according to the above definition} and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors shoul at the earliest stage possible {generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript} disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed {including the grant number or other reference number if any}.
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately {from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties} must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author{s} of the work involved in these services.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee{s} has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Peer review
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
Fundamental errors in published works
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journals editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
Duties of the Publisher
Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Access to journal content
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.
Section A: Publication and authorship
- All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
- Review process are blind peer review.
- The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
- The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
- If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
- Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
- The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
- No research can be included in more than one publication.
Section B: Authors’ responsibilities
- Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
- Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
- Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
- Authors must participate in the peer review process.
- Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
- All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
- Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
- Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
- Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
- Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.
Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities
- Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
- Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
- Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
- Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- Reviewers should not review 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.
Section D: Editors’ responsibilities
- Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
- Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
- Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
- Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
- Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
- Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
- Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.
- Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
- Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
- Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
- Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
- Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
- Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
- Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.
Sources:
- ELSEVIER: Elsevier publishing ethics resource kit
- COPE: Responsible research publication: international standards for authors
- COPE: Cope’s new code of conduct
- COPE: Responsible research publication: International standards for editors
- COPE: Cope short guide to ethical editing for new editors
- COPE: Cope ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
- COPE: The editorial board follows the guidelines for retracting articles issued by COPE
- COPE: Code of conduct for journal publishers
- COPE: Cope retraction guidelines
Abstracting & Indexing
Google Scholar, Dimensions, Garuda, SINTA
Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda) is firmly committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and publication ethics. To ensure originality and to maintain the quality of scholarly works, all submitted manuscripts are subject to plagiarism screening prior to the review process.
1. Author's Responsibility
- Authors are required to ensure that their manuscripts are free from any form of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, and improper citation practices.
- Before submission, authors are strongly encouraged to use plagiarism detection tools (e.g., Turnitin, iThenticate, or other reliable software) to check the similarity index of their work.
2. Editorial Screening
- The editorial team independently verifies the originality of all submissions using Turnitin software.
- A similarity index of less than 20% (excluding references and standard phrases) is generally acceptable. However, the final decision regarding the acceptability of the similarity score rests with the editorial board.
3. Handling Plagiarism
- If plagiarism is detected before review, the manuscript will be returned to the author for revision or may be rejected outright.
- If plagiarism is detected after acceptance or publication, the article will be retracted and appropriate notification will be made to the academic community.
- The corresponding author will be held responsible for any ethical misconduct.
4. Consequences and Sanctions
- Authors found to have committed plagiarism may be subject to sanctions, including a ban on future submissions to the journal.
- In severe cases, the journal may notify the author’s affiliated institution regarding the ethical breach.
Through this policy, JPPGuseda seeks to maintain academic integrity and foster a culture of honesty, transparency, and respect for intellectual property in scholarly publishing.
Policy on the use of GenAI
This policy outlines the journal's stance on the ethical and responsible use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of manuscripts submitted for publication. This policy aims to ensure transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the scientific record.
1. Authorship and Accountability
- AI cannot be an Author: AI tools and AI-assisted technologies (e.g., Large Language Models, Generative AI) do not meet the criteria for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the content, integrity, or originality of the work. Therefore, AI tools or software cannot be listed as authors on any submitted manuscript.
- Authors' Full Responsibility: Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the entire content of their submitted manuscript, including any parts generated, edited, or enhanced by AI tools. This includes the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical soundness of the work. Authors must verify the factual correctness of any statements, citations, data, or figures generated by AI.
- Human Oversight Required: The use of AI tools must be under direct human supervision. Authors must critically evaluate, edit, and revise any material generated by AI to ensure it aligns with scientific standards, accuracy, and ethical guidelines.
2. Transparency and Disclosure
- Mandatory Disclosure: Authors are required to disclose the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of their manuscript. This disclosure must be explicit, specific, and transparent.
- What to Disclose: The disclosure should include:
- The name of the AI tool(s) used: e.g., ChatGPT (OpenAI), Bard (Google), Grammarly, GPT-4, Midjourney, etc.
- The specific purpose(s) for which the AI tool was used: e.g., language refinement, grammar check, drafting of specific sections (specify which sections), brainstorming, data analysis assistance, image generation, etc.
- The extent of AI involvement: A brief description of how the AI tool contributed to the manuscript.
- Where to Disclose: This disclosure should typically be included in one of the following sections:
- Acknowledgements section: (Preferred for general writing assistance)
- Methods section: (If AI was used for specific methodological steps, e.g., data analysis or coding assistance)
- A dedicated "Declaration of AI Use" statement just before the References section or in a footnote on the title page.
Example Disclosure Statement: "Portions of this manuscript were drafted/edited/enhanced using [Name of AI tool, e.g., ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI)]. The authors used this tool for [specific purpose, e.g., improving grammar and clarity/drafting an initial version of the Introduction section]. All content generated by the AI was thoroughly reviewed, edited, and validated by the authors, who take full responsibility for the final content." Or for image generation: "Figure X was generated with the assistance of [Name of AI tool, e.g., Midjourney v5]. The authors provided the prompts and edited the output to ensure accuracy and relevance."
3. Permissible Uses (with Disclosure)
AI tools may be used to assist authors in the following ways, provided full disclosure is made:
- Language and Grammar Refinement: Improving readability, spelling, grammar, and sentence structure.
- Drafting Support: Assisting in the generation of initial drafts of specific, non-research-critical sections (e.g., parts of the Introduction or Discussion for stylistic purposes), which must then be thoroughly reviewed and revised by the authors.
- Brainstorming and Idea Generation: Assisting in conceptualizing ideas or outlining the structure of the manuscript.
- Data Analysis and Visualization Assistance: (Only if verified and reproducible by human authors). If AI is used in data processing, analysis, or generating figures/tables, the specific methods, tools, and validation steps must be clearly described in the Methods section.
- Summarization of Literature: Aiding in summarizing existing literature, but the authors must ensure the accuracy of the summary and proper citation of original sources.
4. Prohibited Uses
The use of AI and AI-assisted technologies is strictly prohibited for:
- Generating Fictitious Content: Creating false data, fabricated research results, or non-existent references/citations.
- Plagiarism: Using AI-generated content without proper attribution (i.e., treating it as original work when it is not fully human-generated or verified). All AI-generated content must be treated as any other source and properly attributed if it relies on existing intellectual property or specific datasets.
- Substituting for Human Intellectual Contribution: AI cannot perform the core intellectual work of research, such as formulating original hypotheses, designing experiments, interpreting novel findings, or drawing original conclusions.
- Violating Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors are strictly prohibited from using AI tools with confidential manuscript content (e.g., uploading the manuscript to publicly available AI models), as this may breach confidentiality, copyright, and the integrity of the peer-review process.
- Misrepresenting Research: Using AI to intentionally mislead readers about the methods, results, or conclusions of the research.
5. Consequences of Misuse
Failure to adhere to this policy regarding the ethical use of AI and AI-assisted technologies will be considered a serious breach of publication ethics. Such breaches may result in:
- Rejection of the submitted manuscript.
- Retraction of the published article.
- Banning of the author(s) from future submissions to the journal.
- Notification to the authors' institution and relevant ethics committees.
This policy will be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect advancements in AI technology and evolving ethical guidelines in scholarly publishing.
Publication Frequency
Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran Guru Sekolah Dasar (JPPGuseda) are published every four months, that is on March, July & November (3 issues per year)
Copyright Notice
The copyright of the received article once accepted for publication shall be assigned to the journal as the publisher of the journal. The intended copyright includes the right to publish the article in various forms (including reprints). The journal maintains the publishing rights to the published articles.