Publication Ethics

Journal of Education, Social & Communication Studies (JESCS) is a leading peer-reviewed and open-access journal and it is an open accessed journal. The main objective of the JESCS is to disseminate scientific knowledge and generate debate in an interdisciplinary context, linking the different areas of the social sciences and communication studies. Thus, this contribution will help society’s development with a rigorous scientific basis, internationally proved. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in the journal, viz: the author, the chief editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publishers. This statement is based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

The essentials of JESCS’ publishing ethics for all groups involved in the publishing process are as follows:

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed JESCS is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Plagiarism

Authors must not use the words, figures, or ideas of others without attribution. All sources must be cited at the point they are used, and reuse of wording must be limited and be attributed or quoted in the text.
JESCS uses Crossref Similarity Check (iThenticate), Turnitin, and our own software to detect submissions that overlap with published and submitted manuscripts. Authors can see our Similarity Check page for more information on how to interpret these reports. The maximum similarity that this journal will tolerate is 20%. Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will be rejected and the authors may incur sanctions. Any published articles may need to be corrected or retracted.

Publication Decisions

The editor of the Journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Editors:

Responsibilities:
The editor of a journal holds a vital position taking important editorial decisions on all peer-reviewed submitted for publication.

Fair Play:
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor should evaluate manuscripts objectively based on their academic merit free of any commercial or self-interests.

Confidentiality:
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Transparency Academic:
The editor should maintain the transparency of the academic research & record, preclude professional needs from cooperating with ethical standards, and always be willing to publish retractions, rectifications, and erratums when required.

Rectitude: Promoting research rectitude must be preserved. If at any stage the publisher suspects any kind of misconduct in research, it should be investigated promptly in detail with suitable authority; and if any suspicious act of misconduct is observed in the peer review, it should be resolved with diligence.

Duties of Reviewers:

Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness:
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality:
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Since peer review is confidential, the reviewer also must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors.

Standards of Objectivity:
Reviews should be conducted objectively, providing a detailed, critically, constructive, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner of the scientific content of the work. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources:
Reviewers should identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge, and also notified of the journal editor of any ethical concerns in their evaluation of submitted manuscripts; such as any violation of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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. Reviewers notify the journal editor about any financial or personal conflict of interest and decline to review the manuscript when a possibility of such a conflict exists.

Duties of Authors:

Reporting standards:
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention:
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the SCAD Independent Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism:
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication:
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources:
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Manuscript:
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that has any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works:
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/ her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Permissions:
Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.

Duties of the Publisher:

Handling of Unethical Publishing Behavior:
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Access to Journal Content:
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

==========================

Focus and Scope
Section Policies
Peer Review Process
Publication Frequency
Open Access Policy
Publication Fee
Instruction for Authors
INDEX
Publication ethics and malpractice statement

Focus and Scope

Online ISSN 3048-1163 JESCS: Journal of Education, Social & Communication Studies is an international peer reviewed and open access journal in language education. The aim is to publish conceptual and research articles that explore the application of any language in teaching and the everyday experience of language in education. Its scope is international in that it welcomes articles from academics, researchers, graduate students and policy makers. All articles should be in English The scope of Journal: Assessment and testing in language learning and education Applied linguistics methodologies and issues Classroom teaching issues Culture and power in language education Curriculum development and implementation Effective methods for language teaching Diversity, multiculturalism and language education Gender, language and higher education Language skills, development, and issues Language learning and identity Literacy, Bilingualism and bilingual education Teacher training, gender and equality

Section Policies

Article

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Author biography

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Review

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Editting

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

JESCS is committed to peer-review integrity and upholding the standards of review. Once your paper has been assessed for suitability by the editor, it will then be single-blind peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. JESCS Review Guideline:

Step 1: Editorial assessment

Peer review follows a number of stages, beginning with submitting your article to a journal. At this first stage, the journal editor will decide if it’s suitable for the journal, asking questions such as: • Has the author followed the journal’s guidelines? • Is this the right journal for this article? • Will the journal’s readers find it interesting and useful? The editor might reject the article immediately, but otherwise it will move to the next stage, and into peer review.

Step 2: First round of peer review

The editor will find and contact potential referees or other researchers or academics who are experts in your field. They will be asked to read your article, and advise the editor whether to publish your paper in that journal

Step 3: Revise and resubmit

You can then amend your article based on the reviewers’ comments, resubmitting it with any or all changes made. You may be asked to make further revisions or the paper may be rejected if the editor thinks that the revisions you have made are not adequate.

Publication Frequency

Orginally, JESCS publishes three times a year, January, May, and September. It first publishes in January 2024.

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 Fee

There is no submission fee for this journal. However, all accepted papers have no to pay the publication and institution fees.

Instruction for Authors

Registration with JESCS

Please note that the corresponding and all submitting authors MUST register with JESCS before submitting an article. You must be logged in to your personal JESCS account to submit an article.

Article Types and Word Count

The specific article types including Research Paper and Review Papers. All papers should be between 4500 – 7000 words in length.

Title

The title is no more than 15 words in length and should be in 14 point normal Times New Roman

Author’s Affiliation

All names are listed based on the following format:

First Author#, (12)
# Institution Affiliation, Country
E-mail: xxx@yyy.zzz

Second Author*,
Institution Affiliation, Country
E-mail: xxx@yyy.zzz

Third Author#
Institution Affiliation, Country
E-mail: xxx@yyy.zzz

Abstract

The abstract should include general significance and conceptual advance of the work clearly accessible to a broad readership. In the abstract, minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references. The abstract should be between 150 and 300 words. The text of the abstract section should be in 11 point normal Times New Roman

Keywords

All article types: you may provide up to 8 keywords; at least 5 are mandatory.

Text

The body text is in 12 point normal Times New Roman. New paragraphs will be separated with a single empty line.

Article Section

Introduction: Succinct, with no subheadings.

Literature Review: This section may be divided by subheadings

Methodology: This section may be divided by subheadings

Result/Findings: This section may be divided by subheadings

Discussion: This section may be divided by subheadings

Conclusion: Succinct, with no subheadings.

References

APA Style is used for IJoLE. Below are the example taken from Finger Lakes Community Collage Charles J. Meder Library, State University of New York, New York (2017).

Book with Single Author:

Gire, A. (2006). An inconvenient truth: The planetary emergency of global warming and what
we can do about it. Emmaus, PA: Rodale.
In-text reference: (Gire, 2006)
If you quote directly from an author you need to include the page or paragraph number of
the quote in your in-text reference, for example:
In-text reference: (Gire, 2006, pp. 29-30)

Book with Two Authors: Mike, P. J., & Balling, R. C., Jr. (2000). The satanic gases: Clearing the air about global
warming. Washington, DC: Cato Institute.
In-text reference: (Mike & Balling, 2000)

Book with Editor as Author: Grady. K. E. (Ed.). (2004). Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Bethesda, MD: Wildlife Society.

In-text reference: (Grady, 2004)
Brochure or Pamphlet: New York State Department of Health. (2002). After a sexual assault. [Brochure]. Albany, NY: Art Press.
In-text reference: (New York, 2002)

An Anonymous Book:
Environmental resource handbook. (2001). Millerton, NY: Grey House.
In-text reference: (Environmental Resource Handbook, 2001)

Articles in Reference Books (unsigned and signed): Greenhouse effect. (2005). American heritage science dictionary. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Schneider, S. H. (2000). Greenhouse effect. World book encyclopedia (Millennium ed. Vol. 8, pp. 382-383). Chicago, IL: World Book.
In-text references: (Greenhouse effect, 2005)

Magazine Articles: Allen, L. (2004, August). Will Tuvalu disappear beneath the sea? Global warming threatens to swamp a small island nation. Smithsonian, 35(5), pp. 44-52. Begley, S., & Murr, A. (2007, July 2). Which of these is not causing global warming? A. Sport utility vehicles; B. Rice fields; C. Increased solar output. Newsweek, 150(2), pp. 48-50.
In-text references: (Begley, 2007; Murr, 2007)

Newspaper Articles (unsigned and signed): College officials agree to cut greenhouse gases. (2007, June 13). Albany Times Union, p. A4. Landler, M. (2007, June 2). Bush’s Greenhouse Gas Plan Throws Europe Off Guard.
New York Times, p. A7.
In-text references: (“College Officials”, 2007)

Journal Article with Continuous Paging: Miller-Rushing, A. J., Primack, R. B., Primack, D., & Mukunda, S. (2006). Photographs and herbarium specimens as tools to document phonological changes in response to global warming. American Journal of Botany, 93, pp. 1667-1674.
In-text reference: (Miller-Rushing, Primack, Primack, & Mukunda, 2006)

Journal Article when each issue begins with p.1: Bogdonoff, S., & Rubin, J. (2007). The regional greenhouse gas initiative: Taking action in Maine. Environment, 49(2), 9-16.
In-text reference: (Bogdonoff & Rubin, 2007)

Journal Article from a Library Subscription Service Database with a DOI (digital object
identifier):

Mora, C., & Maya, M. F. (2006). Effect of the rate of temperature increase of the dynamic method on the heat tolerance of fishes. Journal of Thermal Biology, 31, pp. 337-341. doi: 10.101b/jtherbio.2006.01.055

In-text reference: (Mora & Maya, 2006)

Website: United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2007, May 4). Climate Change. Retrieved From the Environmental Protection Agency website: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange
In-text reference: (United States Environmental, 2007) Gelspan, R. (2007). The Heat Is Online. Lake Oswego, OR: Green House Network. Retrieved from The Heat Is Online website: http://www.heatisonline.org
In-text reference: (Gelspan, 2007)

Acknowledgment This APA Style is taken and modified from Finger Lakes Community Collage Charles J. Meder Library, State University of New York, New York (2017) and American Psychological Association (2017).

INDEX

SCOPUS (hopefully)
Web of Science (Emerging Sources Citation Index)
ERIC (Education Resources Information, US Department of Education)
Sinta (prepared)
Index Copernicus
EBSCO Open Access
Cross Reference
Google Scholar
Indonesia One Search
Bielefeld Academic Search Engine
Garba Rujukan Digital

Publication ethics

Publication ethics and malpractice statement

JESCS is an international journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. The journal publishes original research papers, review articles and case studies focused on foreign language as well as related topics that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use

Duties of Editor

Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer

Publication Ethics