Review Process Policy
(Edu Society: Jurnal Pendidikan, Ilmu Sosial dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat)

Edu Society manages all submitted manuscripts through an online submission and review system. Every manuscript undergoes a rigorous and structured peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scholarly contribution of each publication.

Double-blind review | Minimum of two reviewers | Similarity index ? 25%

Review Policy
1. Editorial responsibility. The editorial board determines which manuscripts are suitable for publication and selects competent reviewers.
2. Adherence to guidelines. Only manuscripts that follow the *Author Guidelines* and the journal template will be processed for review.
3. Double-blind review. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept anonymous to ensure impartiality and objectivity.
4. Reviewers. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers, selected based on their academic background, review experience, and specialization relevant to the manuscript's topic (see the list of reviewers).

Review Process

1. Initial screening. The editorial team checks the scope, structure, and format of the manuscript. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria will be returned to the authors for revision before they can proceed to the review stage.
2. Plagiarism check. Manuscripts are screened using plagiarism-detection software; the maximum allowable similarity index is 25%.
3. Assignment of reviewers. Manuscripts that meet the requirements are sent to at least two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field of law.
4. Peer review. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the criteria listed below. The review process generally takes 4–6 weeks, depending on the availability of reviewers and the complexity of the manuscript.
5. Revision by the author. The author revises the manuscript based on feedback from reviewers and the editor, then resubmits it within the specified timeframe; further rounds of review may be required.
6. Editorial decision. The editor makes the final decision based on the recommendations provided by the reviewers.
7. Final preparation. Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout, and proofreading, and are subsequently published online as an "early view" before being included in a scheduled issue, complete with a DOI.

Evaluation Criteria

1. Originality and novelty of the topic
2. Scientific significance
3. Clarity and coherence of the methodology
4. Accuracy of the analysis and conclusions
5. Appropriateness and currency of references and citations
6. Clarity of writing and adherence to the journal’s template

Decision Categories
DECISION | MEANING
Accepted | The manuscript is approved for publication. Minor revision: The manuscript will be accepted once the minor revisions have been verified by the editor.
Major revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and will be returned to the reviewers.
Rejected: The manuscript is rejected—for example, due to being outside the journal’s scope, having methodological flaws, poor writing quality, or a lack of scientific contribution.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest
The editorial board maintains strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts, the identities of reviewers, and all correspondence related to the review process. Authors and reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest; such disclosures will be handled in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics.

Copyright and Licensing
Prior to publication, authors agree to the journal’s copyright terms; articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.