Peer Review Process

The research article submitted to this online journal will be peer-reviewed. The accepted research articles will be available online (free download) following the journal peer-reviewing process. The language used in this Journal is Indonesian or English.

Reviewing a manuscript written by a fellow scientist is a privilege. However, it is a time-consuming responsibility. Hence, the Journal of Mathematics Education and Science Editorial Board, authors, and audiences appreciate your willingness to accept this responsibility and dedication. Journal of Mathematics Education and Science adheres to a double-blind review process that is rapid and fair and also ensures a high quality of articles published. In so doing, the Journal of Mathematics Education and Science needs reviewers who can provide insightful and helpful comments on submitted manuscripts with a turnaround time of about 4 weeks. Maintaining the Journal of Mathematics Education and Science as a scientific journal of high quality depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to be objective, fair, and insightful in evaluating manuscripts.

If JaMES Editor-in-Chief has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following:

  1. Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their work
  2. Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary
  3. Providing all required information within established deadlines
  4. Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal
  5. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review
  6. Reporting possible research misconduct
  7. Suggesting alternative reviewers in case, they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons
  8. Treating the manuscript as a confidential document
  9. Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript
  10. Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors
  11. Not identifying themselves as authors
  12. Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer
  13. Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work
  14. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge
  15. Writing review report in Indonesian or English
  16. Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript.

Here list of items that need to be reviewed:

  1. The novelty of the topic
  2. Originality
  3. Scientific reliability
  4. A valuable contribution to the science
  5. Adding new aspects to the existing field of study
  6. Ethical aspects
  7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
  8. References provided to substantiate the content
  9. Grammar, punctuation, and spelling
  10. Scientific misconduct