Peer Review Process

JITP: Jurnal Inovasi dan Transformasi Pendidikan applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This system is intended to promote objectivity, confidentiality, fairness, and academic integrity in editorial decision-making.

All manuscripts submitted to JITP undergo an initial editorial screening before being sent for peer review. During this stage, the editorial team evaluates the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, compliance with the Author Guidelines, originality, academic quality, ethical considerations, and overall suitability for further review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are evaluated by qualified independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript. The peer-review process is designed to assess the scientific quality, methodological soundness, originality, clarity, validity of the findings, and scholarly or practical contribution of each submission.

Characteristics of the Peer-Review Process

  1. Minimum of Two Independent Reviewers
    Each manuscript that proceeds to peer review will normally be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject matter of the manuscript.
  2. Double-Blind Review
    The identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential from each other throughout the review process. Authors are therefore required to prepare manuscripts in a manner that does not disclose information that could unnecessarily reveal their identities during review.
  3. Editorial Decision
    The Editor-in-Chief, or a designated Editor acting under the journal's editorial procedures, makes the final decision regarding publication after considering the reviewers' reports, the manuscript's academic quality, compliance with journal policies, and the authors' responses to requested revisions.
  4. Role of the Editorial Board
    The Editorial Board, consisting of academics and professionals with relevant expertise, may provide scholarly advice, recommendations, and editorial guidance to support the quality, consistency, and integrity of editorial decisions.
  5. Editorial and Administrative Support
    The Managing Editor and Editorial Assistants provide administrative and technical support throughout the editorial and peer-review process. Their responsibilities include facilitating communication, monitoring manuscript progress, maintaining appropriate documentation, and supporting the timely handling of submissions.
  6. Confidentiality
    Manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, discuss, or use unpublished information contained in a manuscript for purposes unrelated to the editorial review process.
  7. Conflict of Interest
    Reviewers and Editors must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect their objectivity in evaluating a manuscript. Where a significant conflict exists, the individual concerned should withdraw from the review or decision-making process.

Initial Editorial Screening

Before external peer review, each manuscript is evaluated by the editorial team to determine whether it:

  • falls within the journal's focus and scope;
  • complies with the Author Guidelines and manuscript template;
  • demonstrates sufficient originality and scholarly relevance;
  • meets basic standards of academic writing and research reporting;
  • complies with applicable research and publication ethics; and
  • is sufficiently developed to proceed to external peer review.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for technical revision or declined without external peer review.

Peer Review of New Submissions

Manuscripts submitted directly to JITP and considered suitable after initial editorial screening will be assigned to at least two independent reviewers selected on the basis of their expertise and relevance to the manuscript topic.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate, where applicable:

  • the originality and relevance of the study;
  • the clarity of the research problem and objectives;
  • the appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework;
  • the suitability and rigor of the research methodology;
  • the accuracy and clarity of the presentation of results;
  • the quality and depth of the discussion;
  • the extent to which conclusions are supported by the findings;
  • the relevance and adequacy of the references; and
  • the manuscript's contribution to education, teaching, learning, vocational education, or related fields within the scope of JITP.

Based on their evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following:

  • Accept Submission;
  • Revisions Required / Minor Revision;
  • Resubmit for Review / Major Revision; or
  • Decline Submission.

Reviewer recommendations serve as important scholarly input for the editorial decision but do not independently determine the final publication outcome.

Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors must carefully address the comments and recommendations provided by the Editors and reviewers.

Authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a clear response explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. Where an author does not adopt a particular recommendation, an academic justification should be provided.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the Editor, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions required.

More than one round of revision may be requested when necessary to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal's academic and editorial standards.

Peer Review of Referred or Transferred Manuscripts

Where JITP receives a manuscript through a legitimate referral or transfer process from another journal or editorial network, previously completed peer-review reports may be considered by the Editors where appropriate and where such use complies with confidentiality, ethical, and editorial requirements.

The Editor will evaluate the manuscript and any available review reports before determining whether:

  • the existing review is sufficient for an editorial decision;
  • additional revisions are required;
  • additional independent peer review is necessary; or
  • the manuscript is unsuitable for publication in JITP.

JITP reserves the right to appoint additional reviewers whenever necessary. Authors will be informed if additional peer review is required.

Editorial Decision

Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly merits of the manuscript and the evidence presented during the review process. Editors consider whether the research has been conducted and reported appropriately, whether the findings are supported by the data or analysis, and whether the conclusions are consistent with the results.

Publication decisions are not based solely on perceived prestige, popularity, or potential citation impact. Manuscripts should demonstrate a meaningful scholarly, educational, methodological, technological, or practical contribution within the journal's focus and scope.

The possible editorial decisions include:

  • Accept Submission;
  • Revisions Required;
  • Resubmit for Review; and
  • Decline Submission.

The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or authorized Editor, taking into account the reviewers' evaluations, the authors' responses to revision requests, applicable ethical considerations, and the editorial policies of JITP.