Plagiarism Policy

1. Policy Statement

The International Journal of Education and Learning Studies (IJELS), published by PT. Intelektiva Global Nusantara, is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, originality, and responsible scholarly publishing.

All manuscripts must represent original scholarly work and must be free from plagiarism, inappropriate textual overlap, duplicate publication, and other forms of publication misconduct. This policy applies to Original Research Articles, Review Articles, and all other scholarly content considered by the journal.

IJELS uses Turnitin or other appropriate similarity-detection software to screen submitted manuscripts before peer review. Editorial decisions are based on qualitative assessment of the similarity report and the underlying evidence, rather than on a numerical score alone.

2. Purpose of Similarity Screening

Similarity screening is conducted to:

• Identify unattributed copying or inappropriate reuse of published material.
• Detect potential duplicate or redundant publication.
• Identify excessive self-reuse, text recycling, or insufficient disclosure of previously published work.
• Evaluate the originality and proper attribution of submitted manuscripts.
• Support fair and evidence-based editorial decisions.
• Protect the integrity and reliability of the scholarly record.

3. Similarity Threshold

Manuscripts exceeding 20% similarity may be returned for revision, clarification, or rejected depending on the nature and severity of the overlap.

A similarity score below 20% does not automatically establish originality or guarantee acceptance. Substantial plagiarism from a single source may be unacceptable even when the overall similarity score is low.

Editors examine matched sources, concentrated passages, quotation practices, citation accuracy, methodological expressions, and relevant contextual factors before determining whether the overlap constitutes plagiarism or acceptable scholarly reuse.

4. Similarity Report Exclusions

Where appropriate, the following elements may be excluded from automated similarity calculations or considered separately during editorial assessment:

• Reference lists and bibliographic entries.
• Properly quoted and appropriately cited material.
• Standard article titles, institutional names, and commonly used declarations.
• Established technical terminology and conventional methodological expressions.
• Short, incidental matches that do not indicate substantive unattributed copying.

These exclusions are not exemptions from academic integrity requirements. All borrowed ideas, language, data, tables, figures, and other materials must be appropriately acknowledged. Exclusions are applied consistently and must not be used to conceal problematic overlap.

5. Forms of Plagiarism and Unacceptable Overlap

6. Screening Stages

Plagiarism screening is conducted or repeated as appropriate throughout the editorial process:

1. Initial submission: All submitted manuscripts undergo similarity screening before peer review.
2. After revision: Revised manuscripts may be checked again, particularly when substantial text, analysis, or references have changed.
3. Before final acceptance or publication: Additional screening may be performed to confirm continued compliance.
4. After publication: Published articles may be examined when credible plagiarism allegations or new evidence of overlap arise.

7. Author Responsibilities

All authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted work complies with the principles of academic integrity. Authors must:

• Submit original scholarly work and accurately represent previous research.
• Properly cite all relevant sources of ideas, words, data, and materials.
• Use quotation marks or other appropriate attribution for verbatim text.
• Paraphrase independently and avoid excessive copying.
• Disclose closely related publications, preprints, conference papers, and prior dissemination where relevant.
• Avoid simultaneous submission and undisclosed duplicate publication.
• Obtain copyright permissions where legally required.
• Verify the accuracy of citations and any AI-assisted content.
• Cooperate with requests for clarification or supporting documentation.

8. Editorial Assessment and Actions

Depending on the evidence, seriousness, and circumstances of the suspected plagiarism, the Editorial Board may:

• Request clarification and a response from the corresponding author.
• Require improved citations, quotation practices, or responsible rewriting.
• Return the manuscript for substantial correction or further verification.
• Reject a manuscript containing substantial plagiarism or unacceptable redundant publication.
• Reconsider or withdraw an acceptance decision when serious misconduct is established before publication.
• Refer serious or unresolved allegations to the relevant institution when appropriate.
• Publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction following a post-publication investigation.

Authors should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to specific allegations. Editorial action must be proportionate to the evidence, and similarity reports must be interpreted rather than treated as automatic findings of misconduct.

9. Complaints, Investigation, and Confidentiality

Credible concerns may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, institutions, or other affected parties. Allegations should identify the relevant article or manuscript and provide sufficient supporting information for preliminary examination.

The editorial office will assess the available evidence, seek clarification where appropriate, maintain reasonable confidentiality, and manage potential conflicts of interest during the investigation.

The journal may seek information from relevant institutions or independent experts when the matter cannot be adequately resolved through editorial assessment alone. Findings and actions will be documented according to the journal's recordkeeping procedures.

10. Post-Publication Plagiarism and Corrections

If potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, or substantial unattributed overlap is identified after publication, IJELS will examine the concern under its Publication Ethics and Retraction Policies, taking account of relevant COPE guidance.

Depending on the evidence and its implications for the reliability and integrity of the article, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction. Published notices should be clearly linked to the original article, explain the reason for editorial action, and remain part of the permanent scholarly record.

11. Ethical Standards and Policy References

IJELS supports recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing and uses relevant publication ethics guidance when addressing plagiarism allegations and other concerns.

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidance
• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

The journal's similarity threshold is an editorial screening measure and should not be interpreted as a numerical definition of plagiarism.