Peer Review Process

There are three main steps in checking or reviewing the manuscript submitted by Mimbar Sekolah Dasar's contributors.

First Step:
The editor conducts the initial checking for plagiarism by Turnitin. The manuscript with 20% similarity and above will automatically be rejected. Meanwhile, the free-plagiarism manuscript or the similarity below or equal to 20% will proceed to the research design examination stage. The manuscript that presents good research designs will be immediately preceded to the stage of peer-review. On the contrary, the manuscript that does not present good research designs will be immediately rejected.

Second Step:
The editor distributes the manuscript to the reviewers. Mimbar Sekolah Dasar employs double-Blind Peer Review. Therefore, before submitting to the reviewers, the editor removes the author(s) identity, such as name, email, and affiliation. The reviewers examine the manuscript content using a form review that has been provided on the journal website through a special login for the reviewers. They provide recommendations on the manuscript results for the editor in the type of decisions, namely the manuscript is accepted, revised, or rejected that must be accompanied with the reasons. If two reviewers provide different decisions, the editor will add one other reviewer as the supporter.

Third Step:
The editor sends the result of reviewers' reviews to the author(s). If the manuscript must be revised, but the author(s) does not revise and give a response, the manuscript will be rejected. On the other hand, if the manuscript is accepted, the author(s) must be willing to have their article proceeded to the final proofreading stage. If the revised manuscript still contains major revisions, it will be returned to the reviewers; if it contains minor revisions, the editor will check and decide the final decision. During the review process, there is no communication between the author(s) and the reviewers. The communication is only conducted between the editor and the author(s). For every decision made, the author(s) has the right to get clear rationalization.

In conducting the review process, the editors and reviewers refer to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.