Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Indonesian Journal of Community Service in Education (IJCSE) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, objective, and transparent peer-review process. Every manuscript submitted to the journal is evaluated solely on its academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, and potential contribution to educational community service.

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or political views. IJCSE highly appreciates the valuable time, expertise, and constructive recommendations provided by its reviewers in improving the quality of published manuscripts.

Step 1. Initial Editorial Assessment

Every newly submitted manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment conducted by the Editor or Editorial Office. This evaluation normally takes up to 14 days and includes:

  • Compliance with the journal's aims and scope.
  • Originality and novelty of the manuscript.
  • Manuscript organization and academic writing quality.
  • Compliance with the journal template and submission guidelines.
  • Initial plagiarism screening.

Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they fall outside the journal scope, contain serious methodological weaknesses, fail to meet ethical standards, or exhibit unacceptable levels of similarity.

Step 2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. IJCSE applies a double-blind peer-review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

The peer-review process generally requires 14–30 days, although additional time may be necessary for complex submissions.

Step 3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Originality, novelty, and significance of the work.
  • Relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
  • Clarity of objectives and identification of community problems.
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the methodology.
  • Quality of implementation and community engagement.
  • Validity of findings and discussion.
  • Practical impact and sustainability of the program.
  • Use of relevant and up-to-date references.
  • Compliance with publication ethics.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments and recommendations that assist authors in improving the scientific quality of their manuscripts. Language editing is not considered part of the peer-review process.

Step 4. Editorial Decision

The Editor considers the reviewers' reports before making the final editorial decision. When necessary, additional reviewers or members of the Editorial Board may be consulted.

Editorial decisions include:

  • Accept without revision
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

The complete editorial process generally requires approximately 30–60 days, depending on reviewer availability, the quality of revisions, and editorial workload.

Peer Review Workflow
Submission
↓
Editorial Screening
↓
Similarity Check
↓
Double-Blind Peer Review
↓
Author Revision
↓
Editorial Decision
↓
Copyediting & Proofreading
↓
Publication