Tata Kelola Jurnal Menuju Akreditasi Online Faizal Risdianto IAIN Salatiga

5 Aspek Penting 1. Author Guidelines/Gaya Selingkung. 2. Penyediaan Template Artikel & Konsistensi 3. Diversity of Reviewers, Editors & Authors 4. Publication Ethics sesuai dengan COPE 5. Jumlah Sitasi di GS + Scopus Citedness.

1. Author guidelines Double-Blind Peer Review Guidelines This journal ensures double-blind review for every submitted manuscript. It means that in the review process, this journal conceals both the identity of reviewer and author and vice versa.

Writing arrangement General Organization of the Paper ¬ 12pt, Times New Roman bold

IMRAD VS NON- IMRAD? In scientific writing, IMRAD or IMRaD (/ˈɪmræd/) Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) is a common organizational structure (a document format).

Introduction In Introduction, Authors should state the objectives of the work at the end of introduction section. Before the objective, Authors should provide an adequate background, and very short literature survey in order to record the existing solutions/method, to show which is the best of previous researches, to show the main limitation of the previous researches, to show what do you hope to achieve (to solve the limitation), and to show the scientific merit or novelties of the paper. This section discusses the purposes of the study or research problems, the contribution to knowledge, and research gap. Please state them clearly in the beginning paragraph supported by related theories in the next paragraphs.

Methods Materials and methods should make readers be able to reproduce the experiment. Provide sufficient detail to allow the work to be reproduced. Methods already published should be indicated by a reference: only relevant modifications should be described. Do not repeat the details of established methods. This section explains the rationale for the application of specific approaches, methods, procedures or techniques used to identify, select, and analyze information applied to understand the research problem/project, thereby, allowing the readers to critically evaluate your project’s/study's overall validity and reliability.

Results and Discussion Results should be clear and concise. The results should summarize (scientific) findings rather than providing data in great detail. Please highlight differences between your results or findings and the previous publications by other researchers. The discussion should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature.

Abstract and Keywords Abstract should stand alone, means that no citation in abstract. Consider it the advertisement of your article. Abstract should tell the prospective reader what you did and highlight the key findings. The abstract should be in one paragraph. The font is Times New Roman, 12 pt, italic, and justify. Abstract is in words, which is followed by 3-5 keywords. The abstract should succinctly describe your entire paper. It comprises of the purposes of the research, method, and the findings of the research. Keywords are the labels of your manuscript and critical to correct indexing and searching. Each words/phrase in keyword should be separated by a semicolon (;), not a comma (,).

Conclusions Conclusions should only answer the objectives of research. Tells how your work advances the field from the present state of knowledge. Without clear Conclusions, reviewers and readers will find it difficult to judge the work, and whether or not it merits publication in the journal. Do not repeat the Abstract, or just list experimental results. Provide a clear scientific justification for your work, and indicate possible applications and extensions. You should also suggest future experiments and/or point out those that are underway.

References Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. Cite only items that you have read. Do not inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid excessive self‐citations. Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region. Check each reference against the original source (authors name, volume, issue, year, DOI Number). Please use Reference Manager Applications like EndNote, Mendeley, Zotero, etc. Use other published articles in the same journal as models.

Referensi ideal adalah 30 untuk menuju jurnal nasional dan untuk jurnal internasional. (By Prof Al Makin). Referensi Kurang dari 10 ada Editor yang mengatakan itu adalah tulisan main-main saja. Sumber primer persen dari artikel jurnal dan proceeding. Selebihnya dari buku.

2. Bench-marking of paper template

Our template+consistency

3. Diversity is important

Diversity of Editors

A Request to be a Honorable Editor

Example of acceptance

Rejection is common

4. Publication ethics+COPE

Publicationethics.org/core-practices

Section A: Publication and authorship All submitted papers are subject to strict peer- review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper. Review process is blind peer review. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Authors must participate in the peer review process.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.

Retraction The papers published in REGISTER Journal will be consider to retract in the publication if : 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) the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication) it constitutes plagiarism. it reports unethical research.

5. Journal citedness

Scopus citedness

SCOPUS EVALUATION PROGRESS

Since 22-Aug-2017 REGISTER JOURNAL Submission had been received by Scopus.com and at present it has been achieving the Six th step. We are just waiting for one more last step of the submission (The journal is Under review by Scopus CSAB). Click here for knowing the journey reaching the 6 th step on Scopus Title Suggestion: SCOPUS Title evaluation Tracking.Scopus.comSCOPUS Title evaluation Tracking.

Terima kasih