In the reviewing process, there are at least two reviewers for each manuscript in the related topic. In addition, author(s) can also propose the candidate of reviewers. Judgement from the first reviewer will be main priority for editor to make decision, if there are only two reviewers. In case of three reviewers, decision will be made by editor from recomendations at least two reviewers. Three weeks will be needed for reviewer to complete one round reviewing process.

Generally, the candidate of reviewers will be chosen based on their reputation in the international publication number and quality. Next step, The Editor send the invitation letter for each candidate of reviewer. After the candidate of reviewer informed their availabilities for reviewing process, Editor create account for each reviewer and then send manuscript by OJS.

All reviewing process are in double blind peer review and managed by editor in the OJS (link: Editorial and Publishing Process). Some things that need attention from the authors as well as reviewer are as follows:

1. Originality Of The Paper And Its Contribution To The Field
2. Theoretical / Conceptual Framework
3. Statement Of The Problem
4. Significance Of Research
5. Literature Review
6. Methodology
7. Quality Of Data Or Findings
8. Results And Conclusion
9. Readability And Writing Style

Screening Plagiarism of the texts that go into this journal is done with using Turnitin application.

Editor in Chief will assign the manuscript to Managing Editor for further handling. The Managing Editor will request at least two scientists to review the research article manuscript. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer-review, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence.

Detailed information about the flow for the manuscript submission (author) to the acceptance by the editor is shown in the following figure.

In short, the steps are:

1. Manuscript Submission (by author) (route 1)
2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors) (route 2). Editors have a right to directly accept, reject, or review. Prior to further processing steps, plagiarism check using Turnitin is applied for each manuscript.
3. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers) (route 3-4)
4. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers comments) (route 5)
5. Paper Revision (by author)
6. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with the similar flow to point number 1. (route 1)
7. If the reviewer seems to be satisfied with revision, notification for acceptance (by editor). (route 6)
8. Galley proof and publishing process (route 7 and 8)

The steps point number 1 to 5 are considered as 1 round of the peer-reviewing process (see the grey area in the figure). The editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions:

• Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form;
• Accepted by Minor Revisions, the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections (let authors revised with stipulated time);
• Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revised with stipulated time);
• Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes;
• Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.