Peer Review Process

Pawiyatan: Journal of Teacher Professional Education applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts. The journal adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.

Initial Manuscript Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Team to assess:

Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope
Compliance with author guidelines and journal policies
Originality and similarity level (plagiarism screening)

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage without external review.

Peer Review Stage

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the following criteria:

Originality and contribution to the field
Theoretical framework and literature review
Research methodology and data analysis (if applicable)
Clarity of presentation and academic writing quality
Relevance to teacher professional education

Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations to assist both editors and authors.

Review Decisions

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor will make one of the following decisions:

Accept without revision
Accept with minor revisions
Revise and resubmit (major revisions)
Reject

The editorial decision is communicated to the author along with anonymized reviewer comments.

Revision Process

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ and editors’ comments and to submit a revised version within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection after considering the reviewers’ recommendations and the quality of the revised manuscript. The decision is based on academic merit, relevance, and adherence to ethical standards.

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts or use unpublished material for personal advantage. Any conflicts of interest must be declared, and individuals with conflicts will be excluded from the review process.

Timeframe

The peer review process is conducted efficiently and transparently. The average time from submission to the first decision is approximately 4–8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the revision cycle.

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

The journal acknowledges the valuable contribution of reviewers in maintaining the quality of publications. Reviewer identities remain confidential, unless reviewers choose to disclose their participation.