Peer Review Process

Proses peer review merupakan komponen krusial dalam menjamin kualitas ilmiah, validitas metodologis, serta integritas akademik setiap artikel yang diterbitkan dalam Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Terintegrasi. Proses ini dirancang untuk memberikan evaluasi yang objektif dan umpan balik konstruktif guna meningkatkan kualitas naskah serta memastikan publikasi penelitian yang bermutu tinggi.

Tahapan Proses Peer Review

1. Pengajuan Naskah
Penulis mengirimkan naskah melalui sistem pengajuan daring jurnal. Setiap naskah yang masuk akan diproses secara administratif sebelum diteruskan ke editor.

2. Penilaian Awal (Desk Evaluation)
Editor-in-Chief atau Editor Asosiasi melakukan penilaian awal untuk menilai kesesuaian naskah dengan ruang lingkup jurnal, orisinalitas, kualitas ilmiah, serta kepatuhan terhadap pedoman penulisan. Naskah yang tidak memenuhi kriteria akan ditolak pada tahap ini (desk rejection).

3. Penugasan Reviewer
Naskah yang lolos seleksi awal akan dikirimkan kepada minimal dua reviewer independen yang memiliki keahlian relevan. Reviewer dipilih berdasarkan kompetensi akademik, rekam jejak publikasi, dan bebas dari konflik kepentingan.

4. Proses Review
Reviewer diminta untuk mengevaluasi naskah dalam jangka waktu tertentu (umumnya 3–4 minggu) berdasarkan kriteria berikut:

• Orisinalitas dan signifikansi penelitian
• Ketelitian dan validitas metodologi
• Kejelasan dan koherensi penulisan
• Kecukupan dan relevansi referensi
• Kontribusi terhadap pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan

5. Laporan Reviewer
Reviewer menyampaikan hasil evaluasi dalam bentuk laporan yang mencakup komentar untuk penulis serta rekomendasi kepada editor, yaitu:

• Diterima (Accept)
• Revisi minor (Minor Revision)
• Revisi mayor (Major Revision)
• Ditolak (Reject)

6. Keputusan Editorial
Editor-in-Chief atau Editor Asosiasi mempertimbangkan seluruh masukan reviewer untuk menetapkan keputusan editorial:

• Diterima tanpa revisi
• Revisi minor (ditinjau oleh editor)
• Revisi mayor (dapat dikirim kembali ke reviewer)
• Ditolak

7. Proses Revisi
Penulis diminta melakukan revisi sesuai komentar reviewer dalam jangka waktu yang ditentukan (umumnya 4–6 minggu). Naskah revisi harus disertai dengan respon terhadap setiap komentar reviewer.

8. Keputusan Akhir
Naskah revisi akan dievaluasi kembali oleh editor dan/atau reviewer. Editor kemudian menetapkan keputusan akhir penerimaan atau penolakan naskah.

9. Produksi dan Publikasi
Naskah yang diterima akan melalui tahap penyuntingan, tata letak, dan pemeriksaan akhir (proofreading). Penulis diberikan kesempatan untuk meninjau proof sebelum publikasi. Artikel kemudian diterbitkan secara daring dengan akses terbuka.

10. Kerahasiaan dan Etika
Seluruh proses pengajuan dan penelaahan dilakukan secara rahasia. Jurnal menerapkan sistem  double-blind review sesuai kebijakan jurnal. Jurnal menjunjung tinggi prinsip transparansi, objektivitas, dan kepatuhan terhadap standar etika publikasi ilmiah internasional.

---

Peer Review Process (English Version)

The peer review process is a fundamental component in ensuring the scientific quality, methodological rigor, and academic integrity of all articles published in Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Terintegrasi. This process is designed to provide objective evaluation and constructive feedback to enhance manuscript quality and ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly work.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system. All submissions undergo an initial administrative check before being assigned to an editor.

2. Initial Editorial Screening (Desk Evaluation)
The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor evaluates the manuscript for suitability with the journal’s scope, originality, scientific quality, and compliance with author guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards may be rejected at this stage (desk rejection).

3. Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest.

4. Review Process
Reviewers are typically given 3–4 weeks to evaluate the manuscript based on the following criteria:

• Originality and significance of the research
• Methodological rigor and validity
• Clarity and coherence of presentation
• Adequacy and relevance of references
• Contribution to the field of study

5. Reviewer Reports
Reviewers provide detailed reports including comments for the authors and confidential recommendations to the editor. Recommendations include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

6. Editorial Decision
The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor makes a decision based on the reviewers’ recommendations:

• Accept without revision
• Minor Revision (evaluated by the editor)
• Major Revision (may be re-reviewed)
• Reject

7. Revision Process
If revisions are required, authors are given a specified period (typically 4–6 weeks) to revise their manuscripts and respond to reviewer comments.

8. Final Decision
Revised manuscripts are evaluated by the editor and, if necessary, by the reviewers. The editor makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection.

9. Production and Publication
Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout formatting, and proofreading. Authors review the final proof before publication. Articles are then published online with open access.

10. Confidentiality and Ethics
All submissions and reviews are treated with strict confidentiality. The journal applies  double-blind review, depending on journal policy.The journal upholds transparency, objectivity, and adherence to international standards of publication ethics.