Peer Review Process

Literasi Nusantara implements a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure that all published articles meet the highest standards of quality, originality, and academic integrity. By maintaining an objective evaluation system, the journal ensures that its contributions to the fields of Education, Arts, and Technology are scientifically sound and practically relevant.

1. Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review

To ensure fairness and objectivity, Literasi Nusantara applies a double-blind peer review system. In this model:

  • The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.

  • The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

  • Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two (2) independent reviewers who are experts in the specific subject matter of the submission.

2. Stages of the Review Process

  • Initial Editorial Screening: All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Team. This stage checks for alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, adherence to formatting guidelines, and initial plagiarism screening using specialized tools. Manuscripts that do not meet these basic requirements may be rejected immediately.

  • Peer Review Stage: Manuscripts that pass the screening are sent to two external reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and research track record in Education, Arts, or Technology.

  • Review Criteria: Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

    • Originality and novelty of the research.

    • Methodological rigor and appropriateness.

    • Clarity of arguments and quality of academic writing.

    • Significance of the findings to the development of the "Nusantara" context or global discourse.

    • Proper citation and ethical compliance.

3. Review Timeline

Literasi Nusantara is committed to an efficient yet thorough review cycle:

  • Initial Screening: 1–2 weeks.

  • Peer Review Stage: 4–6 weeks.

  • Author Revision: 2–4 weeks (depending on the level of revision required).

  • Final Editorial Decision: 1–2 weeks after the revised version is received.

  • Total Estimated Time: 10–16 weeks from submission to final decision.

4. Reviewer Recommendations

Based on their evaluation, reviewers will provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept Submission: The article is ready for publication as-is.

  • Revisions Required (Minor): The article needs small adjustments before acceptance.

  • Resubmit for Review (Major): The article requires significant changes and a second round of review.

  • Decline Submission: The article does not meet the scholarly standards or scope of the journal.

5. Final Decision

The final decision to publish or reject a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board, taking into account the feedback provided by the reviewers. If there are conflicting recommendations between the two reviewers, a third reviewer may be appointed to provide a deciding opinion.

6. Post-Acceptance

Once an article is accepted, it will undergo copyediting, layouting, and final proofreading. Authors are required to sign an authorship approval sheet and ensure all graphical/data elements are accurate before the article is officially published online.