Focus and Scope

1. Citizenship Science
2. Value and Norms Education
3. Legal Education
4. Political Education
5. Classroom Action Research (Citizenship Education)
6. Development of teaching and learning Citizenship Education (models, methods, media, sources, evaluations)
7. Development of Citizenship Education textbooks
8. Study of learning content on Citizenship Education
9. Study of Citizenship Education curriculum in school
10. Study of Citizenship Education curriculum in Higher Education

Every manuscript that goes to the editor will be assessed by the reviewer. The review process was conducted in a double-blind review, meaning that the reviewer did not know the identity of the author and so the author did not know the identity of the reviewer.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

1. The manuscript will be checked using the web check plagiarism, turnitin.com
2. The manuscript will go through a review process.
3. The review process uses a double-blind peer review.
4. In the process of reviewing sustainable partners giving consideration related to novelty, scientific impact, conclusions and references used.

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Civicus publish twice a year every June and December.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Publication Ethics

This is the statement of ethics for Jurnal Civicus

This statement was adapted from the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and covered the code of ethics for chief editor, editorial board members, reviewers, and authors. This statement based on:

https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

Articles published in Jurnal Civics are an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge on civic education, and those are a direct reflection of the writer's and institutions' quality. It is, therefore, essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher, and the society.  Editors of Jurnal Civics are committed to guaranteeing that all procedures directed merely to facilitate an objective and intellectual treatment. Further, the editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or particular political and group interest. Software used to avoid plagiarism among the articles.

Duties of Editors

1. Publication Decisions: 

The editor boards journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. 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.

2. Fair Play: 

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

3. 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.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the paper (while handling it) in his or her research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or idea obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests revealed after publication.

5. Review of Manuscripts:

The editor must ensure that the editor for originality initially evaluates each manuscript. The editor should organize and use peer review justly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

A reviewer should review and send the review comments in due period. If the article is not in your area of interest, then revert to the editor so that the other reviewers can be approached.

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2. Promptness: 

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process

3. Confidentiality: 

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

4. Standards of Objectivity: 

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

5. Acknowledgment of Sources: 

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The proper citation should accompany any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. 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.

6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for particular advantage. Reviewers should not review 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

1. Reporting Standard: 

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.

2. 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, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism: 

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must appropriately be cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism, in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4. Multiple 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 manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources: 

Proper acknowledgment 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

6. 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 others 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 paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: 

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.

8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

9. Fundamental errors in published works: 

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original article.

Peer Reviewer

Please write the list of the reviewer. You can find it on setup menu, number 2.5.

Retraction

The papers published in the Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan will be considered to retract in the publication if :

1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
3. it constitutes plagiarism
4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

Screening of Plagiarism

Scanning of plagiarism on the manuscripts will be conducted by using Turnitin software, provided by Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

Publication Fee

This journal charges the following author fees.
Article Submission: 0,00 (IDR)
Fast-Track Review: 0,00 (IDR)
Online Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)

Our journal indexed by:

Jurnal Civicus is published by Civic Education Department, in collaboration with Asosiasi Profesi Pendidikan Pancasila dan Kewarganegaraan Indonesia (Indonesia Association of Pancasila and Civic Education/AP3KnI).

Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-NonKomersial-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.