Reviewer Guidelines

Every manuscript submitted to JUMPA: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan first passes an initial screening by the editor for relevance to the focus and scope, compliance with the author guidelines and template, and a similarity check with Turnitin (maximum 20%). Manuscripts that pass this stage are sent to at least two reviewers through a double-blind peer review. Reviewers are asked to give an objective, critical, and constructive assessment based on the points below.

General Principles

  • Accept an invitation only if the manuscript is within your expertise and you can complete the review on time. If not, decline promptly so the editor can invite another reviewer.
  • Treat the manuscript as confidential. Do not share it with others or upload it to GenAI tools.
  • Inform the editor of any conflict of interest.
  • Give comments politely and with clear reasons. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.
  • Inform the editor if you suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, or other misconduct.

Assessment Criteria

1. Title – Is the title concise, clear, and does it reflect the main focus and findings of the study in educational management?

2. Abstract and Keywords – Does the abstract state the problem, purpose, method, main findings, and contribution? Are the keywords (3–5) relevant and specific?

3. Introduction – Does it explain the background and research problem, review relevant previous studies, state the research gap clearly, and end with the research objectives? Is the novelty of the study clear?

4. Method – Are the research design, setting, participants or data sources, data collection techniques, and data analysis explained clearly and appropriately for the research objectives? For qualitative studies, is data validity (e.g., triangulation) addressed? For quantitative studies, are the instruments and statistical tests appropriate?

5. Results and Discussion – Are the findings presented systematically and supported by original field data? Does the discussion interpret the findings in relation to theory and previous studies, and explain their implications for educational management practice and policy?

6. Conclusion – Does the conclusion answer the research objectives, state the contribution, and mention limitations and suggestions for further research, without simply repeating the results?

7. References – Are all citations listed in the references and vice versa? Are the references mostly recent (the last 10 years) and drawn from reputable journals? Is APA style applied consistently?

8. Language and Presentation – Is the manuscript written clearly and coherently, and are tables and figures informative and properly labeled?

Recommendation

Based on the assessment, reviewers choose one of the following recommendations in the system:

  • Accept Submission
  • Revisions Required (minor revision)
  • Resubmit for Review (major revision)
  • Resubmit Elsewhere
  • Decline Submission

Comments for the author should be written in the review form or the uploaded review file, without revealing the reviewer's identity. Confidential comments for the editor may be written in the separate field provided. The final decision is made by the editor based on the reviewers' recommendations.

These guidelines may also be used by authors as a reference when preparing and revising their manuscripts.