Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Scientiae Educatia focused on the results of the study and review of the literature in the sphere of natural science education and natural sciences in Indonesia. 

 Scopes includes:

  • Result of study and Literature Review on Natural Sciences (Biology, Chemistry, Physics and related studies) in Indonesia
  • Result of study and Literature Review on Natural Sciences Education (Biology, Chemistry, Physics and related studies) in Indonesia.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

  1. All peer review publications will be referred in double-blind review process by at least two reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area.
  2. Results of the review process are normally available within two month of submission.

 

Publication Frequency

Scientiae Educatia is scheduled for publication two times a year, in June and December.


 

Open Access Policy

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 

Publication Ethics

Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains [p-ISSN 2303-1530| e-ISSN 2527-7596] is a peer-reviewed journal published Tadris Biology IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon in Collaboration with Perkumpulan Pendidik IPA Indonesia (PPII) / Indonesian Society for Science Educators. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of posting an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewed and the publisher. This statement based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society. 

Tadris Biology, IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon as publisher of Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing exceptionally seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or additional commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Besides, the Tadris Biologi, IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon, and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should publish. 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.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates 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 use in an editor's 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 help 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 treat as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should conduct 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 reported should accompany by the appropriate 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.

Data Access and Retention

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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original actions and if the authors have used the works, or words of others that this has 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 paper concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgement 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 article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

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

To check the possibility of plagiarism, using the application Plagiarism Checker X.

The article must below 20% of plagiarism.

Plagiarism include:

  1. Word for word Plagiarism. The author uses the words of other authors (exactly) without mentioning the source.
  2. Plagiarism over the source. The author uses the idea of others without giving enough recognition (without mentioning the source expressly).
  3. Plagiarism of Authorship. The author acknowledged as the author of the paperwork of others.
  4. Self Plagiarism. Included in this type are authors publish one article in more than one editor of the publication. And recycle paper/papers. That is important in self-plagiarism is that when taking his own works, then the creation of new works produced must have a meaningful change. This means that the old Works is a small part of the new works were produced. So readers will get new stuff, which is really the author of pour on the paper using the old paper.

 

Publication Charges

Article Charges

No Charge for every Article Submission Charge 

Article Publication

Manuscript Processing Fees charged IDR 600,000 (in rupiah). This includes editing, publishing, and maintaining and archiving.

 

Citedness of Journal Articles in Scopus

Citation Detail:

  1. Nurlatipah, N., Juanda, A., & Maryuningsih, Y. (2015). Pengembangan media pembelajaran komik sains yang disertai foto untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar siswa kelas VII SMPN 2 SUMBER pada pokok bahasan ekosistem. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains4(2), 1-13. Cited by Fitri, R., & Yogica, R. (2019, October). Practicality of student worksheet based on concept and problem solving approach to improve student’s ability to understand concept and high-level thinking in animal development. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1317, No. 1, p. 012191). IOP Publishing URL: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1317/1/012191/pd
  2. Kartimi, K. (2012). Pengembangan Alat Ukur Berpikir Kritis Pada Konsep Termokimia untuk Siswa SMA. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains1(1), 89-98. Cited by Wardani, S., Lindawati, L., & Kusuma, S. B. W. (2017). The development of inquiry by using android-system-based chemistry board game to improve learning outcome and critical thinking ability. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia6(2), 196-205.
  3. Gloria, R. Y. (2017). Efektivitas Pembelajaran Kapita Selekta Biologi Berbasis Masalah Untuk Membentuk Habits Of Mind Mahasiswa Calon Guru. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains6(1), 8-14. Cited by Hayat, M. S., Rustaman, N. Y., Rahmat, A., & Redjeki, S. (2019). The Improvement of Prospective Teachers’ Habits of Mind during the 5E+ e Inquiry Learning Program in Horticulture Course. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education.
  4. Gloria, R. Y. (2017). Efektivitas Pembelajaran Kapita Selekta Biologi Berbasis Masalah Untuk Membentuk Habits Of Mind Mahasiswa Calon Guru. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains6(1), 8-14. Cited by Gloria, R. Y., Sudarmin, W., & Indriyanti, D. R. (2017). Formative Assessment with Stages of Understanding by Design (UbD) in Improving Habits of Mind. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education. 
  5. Kartimi, K. (2012). Pengembangan Alat Ukur Berpikir Kritis Pada Konsep Termokimia untuk Siswa SMA. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains1(1), 89-98. Cited by Dholo, T. F., Firman, H., Kaniawati, I., & Rusdiana, D. (2019, February). Profile of critical thinking skills of pre-service physics teachers: a preliminary study. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1157, No. 3, p. 032059). IOP Publishing. URL: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032059/pdf
  6. Maknun, D., (2012). Keterampilan esensial dan kompetensi motorik laboratorium mahasiswa calon guru biologi dalam kegiatan praktikum ekologi, 1(1), 69-78. Cited by Diana, S. (2018, May). The effect of peer assisted learning (PAL) on anatomic competencies of prospective student’s biology teachers. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1013, No. 1, p. 012015). IOP Publishing. URL: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1013/1/012015/pdf
  7. Gloria, R. Y. (2017). Efektivitas Pembelajaran Kapita Selekta Biologi Berbasis Masalah Untuk Membentuk Habits Of Mind Mahasiswa Calon Guru. Scientiae Educatia: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains6(1), 8-14. Cited by Gloria, R. Y., Sudarmin, S., & Indriyanti, D. R. (2018, March). The effectiveness of formative assessment with understanding by design (UbD) stages in forming habits of mind in prospective teachers. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 983, No. 1, p. 012158). IOP Publishing. URL: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012158/pdf