About the Journal
Focus and Scope
|Name of Journal||Jurnal Kewarganegaraan|
|Publish||Two month of the year|
|Publisher||Departement of Pancasila and Citizenship Education
|Editor-in Chief||T Heru Nurgiansah, M.Pd|
Jurnal Kewarganegaraan is published 2 times in 1 year in June and December. The scope of the article includes:
- Pancasila Education and Citizenship Education
- Social Sciences
- Natural Sciences
- Economics, Accounting, and Management
- Classroom Action Research
- Media and Learning Models
- Nationalism and Patriotism
- Medicine and Health
- Community Service in all Fields of Science
- and Others
Peer Review Process
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Jurnal Kewarganegaraan is published by the Department of Pancasila Education and Citizenship of PGRI University Yogyakarta. Jurnal Kewarganegaraan publishes research articles and scientific studies on the science of citizenship. Each published article has gone through a peer-review process from appointed experts. They are experienced in journal management and article publications.
prestigious at home and abroad. To ensure these things, we implement double-blind reviews, which means that the identities of reviewers and authors hide from each other during the review process. Then experts make decisions based on recommendations of several possibilities: rejected, require major revisions, need minor revisions, or be accepted. In detail, our editorial process is as follows:
- Initial screening. All submissions are initially screened by the Editor-in-Chief to be tailored to the scope and requirements of article submission to the Journal of Citizenship and to be examined for possible plagiarism. Manuscripts that fail to comply with our ethical standards are immediately rejected, as are manuscripts that do not fit the scope of the journal.
- Reviewer assignment. Manuscripts that pass initial screening are then submitted to the editor. It will then be selected at least two relevant reviewers for each article and continued the peer-review process.
- Peer-review. During this stage, reviewers will assess the contents of the manuscript and provide their recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief. Reviews are conducted for 4-8 weeks.
- First decision. After a second (or more) reviewer has submitted a recommendation in the form of a rejected manuscript, asked to be revised (small or large), or accepted as is. If accepted, the manuscript is returned to the author for revision. The final decision to accept the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the recommendations of the editor and after approval by the editorial board.
- Revision. Manuscripts that require revision are returned to the author and given up to four weeks to revise the manuscript. Once the revision is submitted, it is once again assessed by the editor to determine whether the changes are adequate and appropriate, as well as whether the author adequately responds to the reviewer's comments and suggestions. If the revision is deemed inadequate, this step is repeated (the manuscript is returned to the author once again for further revision).
- Final decision. The revised manuscript is accepted or rejected, depending on whether the editor and editor-in-chief have found the manuscript to have been upgraded to a level worthy of publication. If the author is unable to make the necessary or substandard changes to this journal, the manuscript is rejected.
- Language editing. Once the manuscript is received, the manuscript is returned to the author who submits for final editing of the language and its contents; This is a change that improves the readability of the article without changing the substance of the content. The journal requires the author to return the manuscript with proof that changes have been made, which will be reviewed by the editorial board before finally publishing the manuscript.
- Typesetting. The script is then adapted to the template. The final version of the article, to appear in this Citizenship journal, is returned to the author who submitted it for final approval of publication.
- Publication. Congratulation! The published article will appear in the latest issue of the Journal of Kewarganegaraan.
The Jurnal Kewarganegaraan published every month of the year (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and December)
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.
Screening of Plagiarism
Jurnal Kewarganegaraan will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism. Before submitting articles to reviewers, they first checked for a similarity/plagiarism tool by an editorial team member.
The papers submitted to the Jurnal Kewarganegaraan must have a similarity level of less than 20%, and if more are rejected. Plagiarism exposes another personâ€™s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly.
Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. In order to properly judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations: An author can copy another authorâ€™s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the original source. This practice can be identified by comparing the original source and the manuscript/work suspected of plagiarism. Substantial copying implies that an author can reproduce a substantial part of another author without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The substantial term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, being often used in intellectual property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole. Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words, or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more difficult form to be identified
This statement was adapted from the principles of the CommitteeÂ on Publication Ethics (COPE) and covered the code of ethics forÂ chief editor, editorial board members, reviewers, and authors. This statement based on:
Articles published in Jurnal Kewarganegaraan are an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge on civic education, and those are a direct reflection of the writer's and institutions' quality. It is, therefore, essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher, and the society.Â Â Editors of Jurnal CivicsÂ are committed to guaranteeing that all procedures directed merely to facilitate an objective and intellectual treatment. Further, the editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or particular political and group interest. Software used to avoid plagiarism among the articles.
Duties of Editors
1. Publication Decisions:Â
The editor boardsÂ journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.Â The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
2. Fair Play:Â
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The editor and any editorial staff must 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.
4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:Â
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the paper (while handling it) in his or her research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or idea obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests revealed after publication.
5. Review of Manuscripts:
The editor must ensure that the editor for originality initially evaluates each manuscript. The editor should organize and use peer review justly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
Duties of Reviewers
A reviewer should review and send the review comments in due period. If the article is not in your area of interest, then revert to the editor so that the other reviewers can be approached.
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4. Standards of Objectivity:Â
Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
5. Acknowledgment of Sources:Â
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The proper citation should accompany any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:Â
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for particular advantage. 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.
Duties of Authors
1. Reporting Standard:Â
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Data Access and Retention:Â
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism:Â
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must appropriately be cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's paper, 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 behavior and is unacceptable.
4. Multiple Publication:Â
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Acknowledgment of Sources:Â
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
6. Authorship of the Paper:Â
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:Â
If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.
8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:Â
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
9. Fundamental errors in published works:Â
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original article.
The papers published in the Jurnal Kewarganegaraan will be considered to retract in the publication if :
- They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
- it constitutes plagiarism
- it reports unethical research
The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed atÂ https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.
List of Reviewer
Jurnal Kewarganegaraan is licensed under aÂ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Journal of Citizenship began publication in 2017. The first issue of the June issue totaled 5 articles and the second edition in the December issue amounted to 5 articles. With the increasing need for scientific publications, in 2021 the number of articles published is increasing. and since being accredited by Sinta, the Journal of Citizenship is published every month of the year