Tentang Jurnal Ini

Fokus dan Ruang Lingkup

Edunovatica Journal publishes issues on education and innovation of teaching and learning. Author can be lecturer, teacher, college student, and researcher. Article can be the results of didactic development research (DDR) or research and development (RnD), classroom action research, qualitative, descriptive, or quantitative research. We also accept literature review article with some consideration. The scope of education manuscript can be one of below: 

1. Education policy
2. Curriculum
3. Evaluation

While the scope of innovation in teaching and learning manuscript can be: 

1. Teaching method
2. Teaching media
3. assessment

Kebijakan Open Access

Jurnal ini menyediakan akses terbuka yang pada prinsipnya membuat riset tersedia secara gratis untuk publik dan akan mensupport pertukaran pengetahuan global terbesar.

Publication Ethics

Duties of Authors

Reporting Criteria: Authors should accurately describe the original research conducted and provide an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers are expected to present their findings honestly and not to falsify, falsify, or improperly manipulate data. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or wilfully inaccurate representations constitute unethical conduct and are not acceptable. Manuscripts should follow the journal's submission guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they are writing completely original work. Manuscripts should not be submitted to multiple publications at the same time unless the editor agrees to co-publish. Appropriate credit and references should be given to previous related work and publications by other researchers and authors. Primary references should be cited wherever possible. Original text excerpted directly from other researchers' publications should be enclosed in quotation marks with appropriate citations.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publications: Authors should generally not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time. Authors are also asked not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in multiple journals. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time constitutes unethical publishing practice and is not acceptable. Multiple publications of a research project should be clearly identified, with reference to the first publication

Attribution: Authors should cite all data sources used in the study and cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper recognition of the work of others must always be given.

Work authorship: The authorship of a research publication should accurately reflect each individual's contribution to the work and its report. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the reported research. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Where major contributors are listed as authors, those who made less significant or purely technical contributions to the research or publication are listed in the acknowledgments section. The authors also ensured that all authors have reviewed and approved the version of the manuscript submitted and listed their names as co-authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors are expected to disclose in their manuscript any financial or other material conflict of interest that may be construed as affecting the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Major Errors in Published Work: If an author discovers a material error or inaccuracies in a submitted manuscript, the author should immediately notify the journal publisher or editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.

Hazards and human or animal subjects: authors should clearly state in the manuscript whether the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

Distribution Decisions: Based on the survey report of the publication board, the proof-reader can acknowledge, reject, or solicitation alterations to the composition. The approval of the work being referred to and its significance to analysts and per users should constantly drive such choices. The editors might be directed by the arrangements of the diary's publication board and compelled by such lawful prerequisites as will then, at that point, be in force with respect to defamation, copyright encroachment and literary theft. The editors might consult with different editors or analysts in settling on this choice. Editors need to get a sense of ownership with all that they distribute and ought to have systems and strategies set up to guarantee the nature of the material they distribute and keep up with the trustworthiness of the distributed record.

Audit of Manuscripts: Editor should guarantee that every composition is at first assessed by the proofreader for inventiveness. The manager ought to coordinate and utilize peer survey decently and admirably. Editors ought to make sense of their companion audit processes in the data for creators and furthermore demonstrate what portions of the diary are peer evaluated. Editorial manager ought to involve suitable friend commentators for papers that are considered for distribution by choosing individuals with adequate mastery and keeping away from those with irreconcilable circumstances.

Fair Play: The editorial manager should guarantee that every original copy got by the diary is surveyed for its scholarly satisfied regardless of sex, orientation, race, religion, citizenship, and so forth of the creators. A significant piece of the obligation to go with fair and unprejudiced choices is the maintaining of the rule of article autonomy and uprightness. Editors are in a strong situation by settling on choices on distributions, which makes it vital that this interaction is basically as fair and unprejudiced as could really be expected.

Secrecy: The manager should guarantee that data in regards to original copies presented by the creators is kept secret. Editors ought to basically evaluate any expected breaks of information security and patient secrecy. This incorporates requiring appropriately educated assent for the genuine examination introduced, assent for distribution where relevant.

Divulgence and Conflicts of Interest: The proof-reader of the Journal won't utilize unpublished materials revealed in a submitted original copy for his own examination without composed assent of the writer. Editors ought not be associated with choices about papers in which they have an irreconcilable situation

Obligations of Reviewers

Secrecy: Information with respect to original copies presented by creators ought to be kept secret and be treated as advantaged data. They should not be displayed to or talked about with others besides as approved by the editorial manager.

Affirmation of Sources: Reviewers should guarantee that creators have recognized all wellsprings of information utilized in the exploration. Commentators ought to recognize significant distributed work that has not been referred to by the creators. Any explanation that a perception, induction, or contention had been recently revealed ought to be joined by the important reference. The commentators ought to advise the diary right away assuming they run over any anomalies, have worries about moral parts of the work, know about significant closeness between the original copy and a simultaneous accommodation to another diary or a distributed article, or suspect that offense might have happened during either the examination or the composition and accommodation of the original copy; analysts ought to, nonetheless, keep their interests secret and not actually explore further except if the diary requests additional data or guidance.

Guidelines of Objectivity: Review of submitted compositions should be done dispassionately and the commentators ought to communicate their perspectives plainly with supporting contentions. The analysts ought to adhere to diaries' guidelines on the particular input that is expected of them and, except if there are valid justifications not to. The analysts ought to be valuable in their surveys and give criticism that will assist the creators with working on their composition. The commentator ought to clarify which recommended extra examinations are crucial for help claims made in the composition viable and which will simply reinforce or broaden the work

Exposure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged data or thoughts got through peer audit should be maintained classified and not utilized for individual benefit. Analysts shouldn't consider compositions in which they have irreconcilable circumstances coming about because of serious, cooperative, or different connections or associations with any of the creators, organizations, or establishments associated with the papers. On account of twofold visually impaired survey, assuming they suspect the personality of the author(s) inform the diary in the event that this information raises any likely irreconcilable situation.

Immediacy: The commentators ought to answer in a sensible time period. The commentators possibly consent to audit an original copy in the event that they are genuinely sure they can return a survey inside the proposed or commonly concurred time span, illuminating the diary quickly assuming they require an expansion. If a commentator feels it isn't workable for him/her to finish survey of original copy inside specified time then this data should be imparted to the editorial manager, with the goal that the composition could be shipped off another analyst.

Plagiarism Policy

Edunovatica Journal  of  University Pekalongan  recognizes that plagiarism is not acceptable for all author and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified by Edunovatica Journal anti-plagiarism software detection (we are using Turnitin.com )  in an article that is submitted for publication.

"Literary theft is duplicating someone else's text or thoughts and passing the replicated material as your own work. You should both depict (i.e., independent and distinguish) the replicated text from your text and give credit to (i.e., refer to the source) the wellspring of the duplicated text to stay away from allegations of copyright infringement. Counterfeiting is viewed as misrepresentation and has possibly cruel results including cutback of employment, loss of notoriety, and the meeting of decreased or bombing grade in a course."

This meaning of literary theft applies for duplicated text and thoughts:

 1. No matter what the wellspring of the duplicated text or thought.

 2. Whether or not the author(s) of the text or thought which you have replicated really duplicated that text or thought from another source.

 3. Whether or not or not the creation of the text or thought which you duplicate is known

 4. No matter what the idea of your text (diary paper/article, site page, book section, paper submitted for a school course, and so on) into which you duplicate the text or thought

 5. Whether or not or not the creator of the wellspring of the replicated material gives authorization for the material to be duplicated; and

 6. Whether or not you are or alternately are not the creator of the wellspring of the duplicated text or thought (self-counterfeiting).

At the point when counterfeiting is recognized by the Plagiarism Checker programming, the Editorial Board liable for the survey of this paper and will settle on measures as per the degree of literary theft identified in the article in concurrence with the accompanying rules: 

Minor Plagiarism

A little sentence or short passage of one more original copy is counterfeited with no huge information or thought taken from different papers or distributions.

Discipline: An admonition is given to the creators and a solicitation to change the composition and appropriately refer to the first sources.

Transitional Plagiarism

A critical information, passage, or sentence of an article is counterfeited without appropriate reference to the first source.

Discipline: The submitted article is programmed dismissed.

Serious Plagiarism

An enormous piece of an article is counterfeited that includes numerous angles, for example, replicating unique outcomes (information, plan, condition, regulation, articulation, and so forth), thoughts, and strategies introduced in different distributions.

Discipline: The paper is programmed dismissed and the writers are illegal to submit further articles to the diary.

Publication Frequency

EDUNOVATICA : JURNAL INOVASI PEMBELAJARAN was published twice a year in May and November . Every issues consisted of 6 articles.

Indexing

EDUNOVATICA : JURNAL INOVASI PEMBELAJARAN is indexed by:

1. Google Scholar
2. Crossreff
3. Garuda
4. Dimensions
5. PKP Index