Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) is a social studies journal published twice a year in June and December by the Social Studies Department, Faculty Tarbiyah and Teacher Training, Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang.

We welcome authors for original articles (research), review articles, interesting case reports, special articles illustrations that focus on the Social Studies Education.

Subjects suitable for publication include, the following fields of:

Social Studies Education

Social Studies Learning and Development

Media for Social Studies Education

Problem in Social Studies Education

Assesment and Evaluation of Social Studies Education

Development Managemant of Organizing Social Studies Education

However, articles concerned about the "Social Studies Education" are not covered and out of the scope of this journal.

 

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every article sent by the author to J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) will first be checked by editors for the initial evaluation process.
Manuscripts not in accordance with journal criteria based on the results of the editor's evaluation will be rejected. Manuscripts that meet the criteria will be sent to two reviewers using a double-blind method.

The editor then makes a decision based on a recommendation from the reviewer of a number of possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted
The editor has the right to decide which articles will be published.
The editor gives information about the decision to the author.

 

Publication Frequency

J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) published online half a year (June) and in the end of the year (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.

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

  

Budapest Open Access Initiative

 An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While  the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, they are within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Hasil gambar untuk committee on publication ethics logo

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
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.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

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.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
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.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. 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.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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

Reporting standards
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.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
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 concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
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.

Authorship of the Paper
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 there are others who 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other 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.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Screening for Plagiarism

The Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) strongly opposes plagiarism on its own merits. The Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) is committed to blocking plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.

The author must ensure that they have written the original work fully, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others who have been quoted or quoted correctly. Papers found with such problems are automatically rejected and the authors strongly recommend it. Also, important parts of the work have not been published. The author also respects writing in the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) from excessive publication, duplicates, or fraud.

Before the author submits the manuscript to the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) at least first examine the use of plagiarism. The manuscript that loaded is the original manuscript and has never been published with a maximum  of 20% similarity check. When submitting articles published for authenticity checks, the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) recommends using Turnitin, Scanner from http://turnitin.com/. Before using Turnitin Plagiarism for the first time, we strongly recommend that the writer read the instructions for using this plagiarism detector. The plagiarism detector system for the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) uses and is affiliated with Turnitin.

* Please note that the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) is affiliated with Turnitin. *

The article has never been published in other media and does not contain plagiarism. Authors should use reference management software, for example Mendeley or Zotero. Bibliography and reference system for the Journal of J-PIPS (Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial) using Mendeley and Zotero

 

Review Guidelines

General:

1. Put a mark on the wrong part or part that needs to be changed.
2. Put a mark on the right side of the line or the wrong line that needs to be changed.


Details:

1. Title: Effectiveness, Specifications, and clarity.
2. Abstract: Complete and describe the essence of the article.
3. Keywords: Describe important concepts of the article.
4. Introduction: Up-to-date, originality, the relevance of topics, compatibility of important reasons of research objects. 
5. Research Methods: Should emphasize procedures and data analysis for empirical studies.
6. Results: Accuracy analysis.
7. Findings: Recent findings, relevance to interrelated researchers, and the contribution of scientific contributions from findings/ideas to the development of science.
8. Conclusion: Logical, valid, concise, and clear.
9. Suggestion: For practical action, the development of new theories, and further/further research.
10. Pictures / Tables: Centrally located, Not cropped, Good quality to see, image/title of the table, referenced in capital letters
11.  Bibliography: The latest degrees and references to the main book sources and journals or scientific researchers . Rules: minimum 80% of journals or scientific researchers; reference issues maximum of the past 10 years; minimum number of  sources 20.


Complete Manuscript Review Process:

1. Writing: Is the script easy to follow, that is, has a clear logical and organizational development?
2. Is the script concise and easy to understand? Every part that has to be reduced,
3. Removed / expanded / added?
4. Pay attention if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are only a few places that aren't properly spoken or correct, make a note to tell the author of certain places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select one or two examples if necessary - don't try and edit them all).
5. Abbreviations: Used wisely and arranged so that the reader will have no trouble remembering what the abbreviations represent.
6. Follow the style, format, and other journal rules.
7. Quotations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.

Decision Category:

Publish: No Need for Revision
Minor: Revisions can be made by the Editor-In-Chief or those who help
Major: Revisions can only be made by the author
Rejected: Not scientific or too much

 

Revision Guidelines

The paper that has received the results of the review is expected to be immediately revised to adjust the suggestions and questions that exist in the review results. The author is given no later than 15 days to revise his paper counted since the submission of the review results. If at that time the author does not upload the revised paper, then the paper will not be refused to be published (reject). Renewal time extensions can be obtained in accordance with strong demand and reason. The revised paper is further uploaded to Journal website and also sent via email jpips@uin-malang.ac.id.

Following the provisions of the revised paper in Journal :

  1. When a reviewer gives comment on paper (in the comment box), the writer asked to directly reply to that comment box. The answer from the author can be Information that has been done revision or reason/argumentation if the author is not willing to revise for some reason (please can be submitted in the comments field already available briefly and details).

  2. Attached sample of revision process paper in Journal to facilitate revision process by the author.