Focus and Scope

The focus of IJSME is to integrate cultural perspectives into science and mathematics education, creating a platform that bridges local wisdom with contemporary educational practices. While centered on the Indonesian educational context, IJSME also welcomes contributions from international scholars whose research aligns with these themes, fostering a global exchange of innovative ideas and practices.

Scope of IJSME:

1. Ethnomathematics and Ethnoscience: Studies that explore how local wisdom and cultural practices can enrich science and mathematics education, linking students’ cultural identities with academic learning.

2. Innovative Learning Media and Technology: Research focused on developing and applying digital and hands-on tools to deepen conceptual understanding, with an emphasis on culturally relevant and sustainable learning resources.

3. Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning Models: Frameworks and methodologies that incorporate students' cultural backgrounds to enhance engagement, inclusivity, and responsiveness in learning environments.

4. Culturally Insightful Assessment and Evaluation: Research on creating fair and inclusive assessment tools that accurately reflect the diverse cultural backgrounds and abilities of students in science and mathematics.

Additionally, IJSME accepts articles on unique and specific topics within science and mathematics education, enriching the field with diverse cultural insights and interdisciplinary approaches.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The IJSME is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Every paper submitted to the IJSME for publication is subject to peer review. The peer review in this journal is an evaluation of the submitted paper by two or more individuals of similar competence to the author. It aims to determine the academic paper's suitability for publication. The peer review method is employed to maintain standards of quality and provide credibility for the papers. The peer review at IJSME proceeds in 9 steps with the description as follows.

1. Submission of Paper

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is carried out via an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). But in order to facilitate authors, IJSME temporarily also accepts paper submissions by email.

2. Editorial Office Assessment

The submitted paper is first assessed by the IJSME's editor. The editor checks whether it is suitable for the Journal's focus and scope. The paper's composition and arrangement are evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. In addition, an assessment of the minimum required quality of the paper for publication begins at this step, including one that assesses whether there is a major methodological flaw. Every submitted paper that passes this step will be checked by Turnitin to measure the similarity index which leads to plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief checks if the paper is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant for publication. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

4. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals who he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers (also known as referees) based on expertise, the closeness of research interest, and no conflict of interest consideration. The peer review process at IJSME involves a community of experts who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial reviews. The impartiality is also maintained by the double-blind peer review employed in this journal. That said, the reviewer does not know the author's identity, conversely, the author does not know the reviewer's identity. The paper is sent to reviewers anonymously.

5. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for the suggestion of an alternative reviewer, when he or she declines to review.

6. Review is Conducted

The reviewers allocate time to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor consider all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely between both reviewers, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to obtain an extra opinion before making a decision.

8. The Decision is Communicated

The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.

9. Final Steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to copy-editing. Suppose the article is rejected or sent back to the author for either major or minor revision. In that case, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. The author should make corrections and revise the paper per the reviewers' comments and instructions.

After revision has been made, the author should resubmit the revised paper to the editor.

If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive the revised version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.

If the editor is happy with the revised paper, it is considered to be accepted. The accepted papers will be published online and all are freely available as downloadable pdf files.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publication Ethics and Misconduct

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

IJSME is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the IJSME does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the IJSME are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

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 are blind peer review. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. No research can be included in more than one publication. IJSME adheres to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;

2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;

3. Final approval of the version to be published; and

4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. The criteria used to determine the order in which authors are listed on the byline may vary, and are to be decided collectively by the author group and not by editors. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer-review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors. The byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors whichever names appear on the byline. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators, sometimes called non-author contributors, if there is a note associated with the byline clearly stating that the individual names are elsewhere in the paper and whether those names are authors or collaborators.

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.

Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.

Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.

Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.

Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

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

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

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.

Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.

Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.

Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.

Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.

Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.

Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.

Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.

Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.

Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board

Research ethics

Research involving humans

Research studies on humans (individuals, samples, or data) must have been performed in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Prior to starting the study, ethical approval must have been obtained for all protocols from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines for research on humans. A statement to confirm this must be included within the manuscript, which must provide details of the name of the ethics committee and reference/permit numbers where available.

For non-interventional studies (e.g. surveys), where ethical approval is not required (e.g. because of national laws) or where a study has been granted an exemption by an ethics committee, this should be stated within the manuscript with a full explanation. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee which provided this should also be included. However, if the researcher is in doubt, they should always seek advice from the relevant department before conducting the study.

Non-stigmatizing and non-discriminatory language should be used when describing different groups by race, ethnicity, age, disease, disability, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Human studies categorized by such groupings should include an explanation of the definitions and categories, including whether any rules of human categorization were required by the relevant funding agencies.

Ethical approval for all studies must be obtained before the research is conducted. Authors must be prepared to provide further information to the journal editorial office upon request.

Ethical considerations for different human study designs

Consent for research involving children, adolescents, and vulnerable or incapacitated study participants

Written informed consent must be obtained from the parent or guardian of any participants who are not able to provide full informed consent themselves. Age of legal adulthood is determined by the country in which study participants are based, which is typically between ages 16-18. A statement to confirm informed consent has been obtained must be included within the manuscript.

In settings where verbal informed consent has been obtained rather than written informed consent, this must be explained and stated within the manuscript.

In accordance with the principles outlined in the Nuremberg Code and the Belmont Report, informed consent must have been given with free will, under no coercion or bribery of any kind.

Retrospective studies

Researchers must confirm they have obtained ethical approval to conduct the study, as well as permission from the dataset owner to use the information in databases/repositories for the purposes of the research they are conducting. Where permission to use information from a database/repository is not required (e.g. where it is publicly available and unrestricted re-use is permitted via an open license), a statement to explain this must be included within the manuscript.

Data acquired must be kept anonymized unless otherwise advised by the owners of the content in the database. Where participants’ details are not required to be anonymized, authors must be able to provide evidence that written informed consent, including consent to publish, was obtained from participants. A statement to confirm this must be included within the manuscript.

Survey studies

Researchers must ensure they have informed all participants why the research is being conducted, whether or not anonymity is assured, and how the data they are collecting is being stored. The participant’s right to confidentiality should always be considered and they should be fully informed about the aims of the research and if there are any risks associated. Their voluntary consent to participate should be recorded and any legal requirements on data protection should be adhered to.

As with all research studies, ethics approval from an appropriate IRB/local ethics committee must be obtained prior to conducting the study. A statement to confirm this must be included within the manuscript. In settings where ethics approval for survey studies is not required, authors must include a statement to explain this within the manuscript.

Covert observational research

As the nature of this type of research does not provide study participants the opportunity to opt-out or provide full informed consent, researchers must ensure they have considered the full rationale for the covert nature of their research and obtain ethical approval to conduct the study from an appropriate ethics committee. Ideally, researchers should seek informed consent from the study participants after the completion of the study. Authors must include a statement within the manuscript to provide the rationale for the covert nature of the research and the details of the name of the ethics committee(s) which approved the study and include the reference/permit numbers where available. Please note, the Editor reserves the right to deem research of this type not suitable for consideration in their journal.

Research on indigenous communities

Authors should be aware of any specific research ethics approval and informed consent procedures which need to be followed in order to conduct research in communities where special processes for permissions may exist. Authors should also be aware of cultural sensitivities or any restrictions associated with the publication of content, including images included in their manuscripts. In many indigenous communities, additional permissions may need to be sought from community leaders or an Elder.

Authors working with indigenous communities are advised to consult appropriate guidelines for ethical research and publishing (including requirements for authorship) such as the AIATSIS Guidelines for ethical publishing, the National Inuit Strategy on Research and Interviewing Elders: Guidelines from the National Aboriginal Health Organization. Authors conducting research using media tools are advised to consult appropriate guidelines such as the On Screen Protocols & Pathways: A Media Production Guide to Working With First Nations, Metis, and Inuit Communities, Cultures, Concepts & Stories.

Screening for Plagiarism

Manuscript submitted to IJSME will be screened using Turnitin similarity detection tool. IJSME will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

IJSME wants to ensure that all authors are careful and comply with international standards for academic integrity, particularly on the issue of plagiarism.

Plagiarism occurs when an author takes ideas, information, or words from another source without proper credit to the source. Even when it occurs unintentionally, plagiarism is still a serious academic violation and unacceptable in international academic publications.

When the author learns specific information (a name, date, place, statistical number, or other detailed information) from a specific source, a citation is required. (This is only forgiven in cases of general knowledge, where the data is readily available in more than five sources or is common knowledge, e.g., the fact that Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world.)

When the author takes an idea from another author, a citation is required even if the author then develops the idea further. This might be an idea about how to interpret the data, either what methodology to use or what conclusion to draw. It might be an idea about broad developments in a field or general information. Regardless of the idea, authors should cite their sources. In cases where the author develops the idea further, it is still necessary to cite the original source of the idea, and then in a subsequent sentence, the author can explain her or his more developed idea.

When the author takes words from another author, citation and quotation marks are required. Whenever four or more consecutive words are identical to a source that the author has read, the author must use quotation marks to denote the use of another author's original words; just a citation is no longer enough.

IJSME takes academic integrity very seriously, and the editors reserve the right to withdraw acceptance from a paper found to violate any of the standards set out above.

Indexing and Abstracting

IJSME is abstracted and indexed in the following databases:

1. DOAJ

2. SINTA 2

3. Google Scholar

4. DOI Crossref

5. MORAREF

6. Dimensions

7. Garuda

8. EBSCO

Article Processing Charge

IJSME does not charge any submission or publication fees, and no fees are incurred for article processing or for the review process.

Note:

Any translation or proofreading costs are paid by the author. Translation and proofreading services are provided by external parties.

Correction and Retraction

IJSME takes its responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content for all end users very seriously. Changes to articles after they have been published online may only be made under the circumstances outlined below. IJSME places great importance on the authority of articles after they have been published and our policy is based on best practices in the academic publishing community.

An Erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes any correction(s) resulting from errors or omissions. Any effects on the conclusions of the paper should be noted. The corrected article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of erratum is given. The Erratum is made freely available to all readers and is linked to the corrected article.

A Retraction is a notice that the paper should not be regarded as part of the scientific literature. Retractions are issued if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, this can be as a result of misconduct or honest error; if the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission, or justification; if the work is plagiarized; or if the work reports unethical research. To protect the integrity of the record, the retracted article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of retraction is given, is made freely available to all readers, and is linked to the retracted article. Retractions can be published by the authors when they have discovered substantial scientific errors; in other cases, the Editors or Publisher may conclude that retraction is appropriate. In all cases, the retraction indicates the reason for the action and who is responsible for the decision. If a retraction is made without the unanimous agreement of the authors, that is also noted. In rare and extreme cases involving legal infringement, the Publisher may redact or remove an article. Bibliographic information about the article will be retained to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

A Publisher's Note notifies readers that an article has been corrected subsequent to publication. It is issued by the Publisher and is used in cases where typographical or production errors (which are the fault of the Publisher) affect the integrity of the article metadata (such as title, author list, or byline) or will significantly impact the readers' ability to comprehend the article. The original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. Publisher's Notes are freely available to all readers. Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the metadata or a reader's ability to understand an article and that do not involve a scientific error or omission will be corrected at the discretion of the Publisher.

In such a case, the original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. The date the correction is made is noted on the corrected article. Authors should also be aware that an original article can only be removed and replaced with a corrected version less than one year after the original publication date. Corrections to an article that has a publication date that is older than one year will only be documented by a Publisher's Note.

The following guideline may also be helpful: COPE Guidelines for Retracting Articles

Digital Preservation

IJSME strives for the constant availability of published articles. With this in mind, IJSME content is continually archived and preserved in the library of Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung.

Revenue Sources, Advertising, and Direct Marketing

Publication Frequency

IJSME is published three times a year, with issues released in March, July, and November.

Deposit Policy

The submitted version, accepted version, and published version can be deposited in an institutional or other repository of the author’s choice at any time. A few to mention, author(s) may deposit and use the document as follows:

- on the personal website

- on the company or institutional repository

- on subject repositories

- with individuals requesting personal use for teaching and training within the author's institution, and as part of an author's grant applications or theses/doctorate submissions, etc

Please visit the journal Copyright Notice make sure that you consult all of related policies on the website to prevent any disputes or doubts. If you have any inquiries, contact Editor infoijsme@radenintan.ac.id.

Withdrawal of Manuscript

The author is not allowed to withdraw submitted or published manuscripts (unless there are compelling reasons), because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and reviewers spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscripts and works invested by the publisher.

If the author still requests withdrawal of his/her manuscript the author will be asked to submit an "Article withdrawal Form" signed by all authors (or) the corresponding author of the manuscript stating the reasons for manuscript withdrawal. Authors must not assume that their manuscript has been withdrawn until they have received appropriate notification to this effect from the editorial office. Please contact infoijsme@radenintan.ac.id for the "Article withdrawal Form".

However, it is unethical to withdraw a submitted or published manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.  We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)

Authors and readers can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, but they must give appropriate credit (cite to the article or content), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright of the article shall be assigned to IJSME and Unit Riset dan Publikasi Ilmiah Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Raden Intan Lampung as publisher of the journal.

Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.