Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

MASA is a journal that aims to publish articles dedicated to the development of history education and scientific history. Articles can be a result of conceptual thinking, ideas, innovation, creativity, best practices, book reviews and the research that has been done.

As for the study of other disciplines that examine topics related to history education and history such as:

  1. Field of History Education, for example the development model of teaching history, action research, lesson planning, the implementation process of learning, evaluation of learning history, learning innovation within the scope of the teaching of history.
  2. History of the town's history, for example, the history of the movement, the history of independence, labor history, ideology history, social history, women's history, military history, cultural history and all things related to the history of science.

As well as the study of the history education and other related educational history.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are checked by qualified peer review and the authors are subject to blind-peer review whose identities will remain anonymous. The peer review process will be done after the initial screening by the consulting editors of the editorial board. The reviewers, who will perform the blind-peer reviews, comprise renowned national and international academicians and practitioners specializing in various science and technology field. Editor receives manuscript Reviewers read and provide comments to the editor The decision is made by the reviewer: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject Feedback sent to an author Revisions Final decision Article is published Submitted papers are evaluated by at least two anonymous referees for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation (blind-peer review). The Editor shall inform you of the results of the review as soon as possible, hopefully in 30 to 60 days. Plagiarism detection of articles in this journal is carried out by using plagiarismcheckerx.com (Web Checker) and Mendeley as a Tool Reference Manager. The language used in this MASA : Journal of History. The Editor shall inform you of the results of the review as soon as possible, hopefully between 1 - 2 months. Please notice that may be paper submissions to MASA Journal the duration of the review process can be up to 3 months.

 

Publication Frequency

MASA : Journal of History is a research scientific journal published two times a year in the following months June and December by IKIP PGRI Pontianak with e-ISSN: 2685-3736. Every issue consists of at least 6 articles and therefore every volume has at least 12 articles/reviews.

 

Open Access Policy

MASA: Journal of History is a peer-reviewed journal with open access. The article processing or delivery of the manuscript submitted to the manager or editor through an online system or by using the OJS Open Access publishing model.

In this publishing model, papers are peer-reviewed in the normal way under editorial control. The paper appears electronically and freely available on our website. Authors can also use articles that have been published in pdf format either for non-commercial use on a personal website or non-commercial institutions. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of articles

 

Creative Commons License
MASA: Journal of History is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

This statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher, namely IKIP PGRI Pontianak.

JOURNAL PUBLISHER CODE ETHICS
  1. Determining the name of the journal, the scope of science, the timeline, and the accreditation.
  2. Determining the membership of the editorial board.
  3. Defining the relationship between publishers, editors, peer review, and other parties in the contract.
  4. Appreciating the confidentiality of the contributing researchers, author, editor, and peer review.
  5. Applying the norms and regulations regarding intellectual property rights especially on copyrights.
  6. Conducting the policy reviews on the journals and present it to the authors, editorial board, peer review, and readers.
  7. Making the behavior code guidelines for editor and peer review.
  8. Publishing journals on a regular basis.
  9. Ensuring the availability of resources for sustainability journal publishing.
  10. Establishing cooperation and marketing network.
  11. Preparing for the licensing and other legal aspects.

EDITOR CODE ETHICS

  1. Improving the quality of publications.
  2. Ensuring the process to maintain the quality of published papers.
  3. Leading the freedom in delivering an opinion.
  4. Maintaining the integrity of the author's academic track record.
  5. Conveying corrections, clarifications, withdrawal, and an apology if necessary.
  6. Owning the responsibility for styling and formatting the paper, while the contents and any statements in the paper are the responsibility of the authors.                                                          
  7. Assessing policies and attitudes of the published journal from the author and peer review to increase responsibility and minimize errors.
  8. Having an open-minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who are different than their personal opinion.               
  9. Prohibiting in defending our own opinion, the author or third parties which may result in a false decision.
  10. Encouraging the author, in order to make improvements to the paper until it worth to publish.

PEER REVIEWER CODE ETHIC

  1. Receiving the task from the editors to review the papers and submit the review to the editor, as a matter of determining the feasibility of the paper for publication.
  2. Reviewing the papers in a timely manner (on time) in accordance with the style guide based on scientific principles (method of data collection, the legality of the author, conclusions, etc.).
  3. Reviewing the papers that have been corrected in accordance with the standards.
  4. Encouraging the author to make improvements in the papers by providing feedback, suggestions, feedback, and recommendations.
  5. Maintaining the author's privacy by covering the results of the corrections, suggestions, and recommendations received by the author.
  6. Reviewers must not review any papers that involve the reviewers in their work, directly or indirectly.
  7. Following the guidelines for peer review in reviewing papers and assessing the evaluation form paper given by the editors.
  8. Reviewing papers substantively by not correcting the grammar, punctuation, and mistype.
  9. Ensuring the principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritize the benefit of the paper for the development of science, technology, and innovation; also comprehending the impact on the development of science writing. 
  10. Prohibiting in defending own opinion, the author or third parties which may result in decision reference becoming non-objective.                                                                       
  11. Upholding the value of objectivity and free from any influences.                                  
  12. Ensuring the confidentiality of findings in the paper until it is published.                                
  13. Having a broad understanding of the expertise and ability to provide a review of the paper appropriately and correctly.
  14. Refusing to do a review of the research is not from the field of expertise. Instead, the peer review should be giving the recommendation to the researcher if there is any other expert on the subjects.  
  15. Having an open-minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who are different than their personal opinion.
  16. Refusing to do the review if the deadline given by the editor cannot be reached. If absent the peer review should notify the editor as early as possible.      
  17. The results of the review must be presented in an honest, objective, and supported by clear arguments. Some possible recommendations from the review are: 
  • Accepted without repair
  • Accepted with minor repairs (after repaired by the author, it is not necessary to go to peer review)
  • Accepted with major repairs (after repaired by the author, return to the peer review for re-review)
  • Rejected and recommended for other publication
  • Rejected and recommended not to publish to any publication because scientifically the paper is flawed for the community.

    18.  Giving rejection for the last recommendation as to the last choice related to the feasibility of the papers or with an indication of severe violations of the code of ethics related to the author.

    19. Reviewed papers aren’t allowed to be used for personal or third-party interests. Moreover, The use of some of the contents of the reviewed papers must have received permission from the author.

AUTHOR/ARTICLE WRITER CODE ETHICS

  1. Author collectively responsible for the work and the content of the article which cover methods, analysis, calculation, and details.
  2. The author immediately responds to the comments made by the peer review professionally and timely.
  3. The author should inform the editor if they retract their paper.         
  4. The author describes the limitations of the study.                        
  5. The author respects the publishers if they demand to not to publish the findings in the form of interviews or through any other media before the publication.
  6. The author informs the editor of (a) paper that is part of a phased research, multidisciplinary, and different perspectives.                                  
  7. The author makes a statement that the papers submitted for publication are original, have not been published anywhere in any language, and not in the process of submission to another publisher.
  8. If there is an error in the paper, the author should immediately notify the editor or publisher.                                        
  9. The use of materials from other publications that are copyrighted should be given written permission and gratitude.
  10. The author refers to the work of others as appropriate in citations and quotations used in the paper.                                           
  11. When delivering new discoveries or improving inventions the authors should mention the job previous researcher/writer/founder.                                    
  12. The author is not allowed to give a bibliography of the publications if they do not read the publication.                                 
  13. If requested, the authors prepared the proof that the research has already met the requirements of the research ethics including the field notes.
  14. The author adequately responds if there are any comments or feedback after the paper published.

 

Publication Fee

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are NOT required to pay an Article Submission Fee.

Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are NOT required to pay an Article Submission Fee.