About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Pedagogy | Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran (JPP) is an national, refereed publication for all those who teach and support learning in all degree of education and those who undertake or use research into effective learning, teaching and assessment in primary and secondary, colleges and universities. The journal has an objective of improving the status of teaching and learning support as professional activity and so looks at academic theory and practice applicable in/to all disciplines and contexts/countries in all degree of education. This journal has more than met all people expectations. It is refreshing to see both a high practically-oriented content in an educational journal, and material that can be easily understood by those of us without training. JPP serves as a medium for everyone interested in how to improve educational practice, the journal has a clear value in the field of learning and instruction. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Peer Review Process

Editorial Procedure

All articles/manuscripts are initially reviewed by the Editor.  Only those articles/manuscripts that meet the standards of the journal, and fit within its aims and scope, will be sent to expert reviewers.  Authors of articles/manuscripts can expect a decision normally within three working days as to whether or not their article/manuscript will be sent to the reviewers or instead be rejected at this stage.  Should the decision be to ‘desk reject’ it at this stage, authors can be assured of a supportive response which offers feedback that is constructive and helpful in nature.

If an article/manuscript is sent to the reviewers, all references to the author name and institution are removed from the article/manuscript.  Active Learning in Higher Educationrecognises that authors are keen to get a decision as soon as possible, and reviewers are asked to return their decisions to the Editor within four weeks so that the decision can be sent to authors within that timeframe.

At that stage, authors get one of the four standard decisions, that is, ‘accept, as is’, ‘conditional accept, but minor changes are required’, ‘conditional accept, but major changes are required’ or ‘reject’.  Active Learning in Higher Education recognises that authors, and the Journal, are keen to ensure that any article/manuscript accepted for publication is the best that it can be and so authors can be assured of comprehensive, constructive comments from the reviewers and the Editor.  Authors whose work has been considered by Active Learning in Higher Education regularly praise this, and also the fast turnaround time, as two of the strengths of this particular journal.

When revisions have been satisfactorily completed, the Editor explains the next steps in the publication process, including when the article/manuscript is likely to appear in print, hard copy (it will appear in Online First within a very short timescale and long before it appears in print, hard copy).

What to Expect During Peer Review

What to expect during peer review. Understanding peer review infographic. What is peer review, and what do you need to know as an author?

Step 1: Editor 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 two or three 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.

So what are they looking for? This depends on the subject area, but they will be checking:

  • your work is original or new;
  • your study design and methodology are appropriate and described so that others could replicate what you’ve done;
  • you’ve presented your results clearly and appropriately;
  • your conclusions are reliable and significant;
  • the work is of a high enough standard to be published in the journal.

You’ll then be given feedback about your article, telling you if any changes need to be made before it can be published. Our authors tell us that the reviewers’ comments can be extremely helpful, ensuring that the article is of a high quality. Please note the final editorial decision on a paper and the choice of who to invite to review is always at the editor’s discretion.

Step 3: Revise and resubmit
You can then amend your article based on the reviewers’ comments, resubmitting it with any or all changes made. If you decide you don’t want to accept all the reviewers’ comments, you can include a brief explanation of why you don’t believe they are applicable with your resubmitted article. The editor can then make an assessment, and include your explanation when the amended article is sent back to the reviewers.

Step 4: Accepted
And that’s it, you’ve made it through peer review. Next stop is production.

Peer Review Integrity

Every research article published in a JPP has been through peer review as outlined in the journal’s aims and scope information; its quality, validity, and relevance assessed by independent peers within the relevant field. We believe in the integrity of peer review, with every journal we publish ascribing to the following statement:

All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening, anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees, and consequent revision by article authors when required. The published article constitutes the final, definitive, and citable Version of Scholarly Record.

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Policy

JPP operates a strictly blind peer review process in which the reviewer’s name is withheld from the author and, the author’s name from the reviewer. The reviewer may at their own discretion opt to reveal their name to the author in their review but our standard policy practice is for both identities to remain concealed. Should an article/manuscript be considered suitable for review, it is reviewed by single reviewers.

Criteria Used in the Review

The emphasis is very much on research. This is taken to mean that the study described within the article/manuscript should make a contribution to the body of knowledge (‘fill’ a ‘gap’ in this body of knowledge) about an aspect of the learning and teaching in all degree of education, regardless of discipline, and regardless of context/country. Examples of the kinds of topic which affect us all, regardless of where/what we teach, are assessment, induction, personal development planning, the use of technologies, etcetera. Articles/manuscripts should not be ‘a description of what we do/did with our own students’, as this is a study which makes a contribution to the knowledge of the authors rather than making a contribution to the body of knowledge. It should instead address a common and particular problem, a challenge, an issue identified in the literature, and so report a piece of research which has shed some light on that problem, challenge, issue. It should fill this particular gap in our knowledge by making its contribution to practice and the theory or theories underlying this.

A description of such a piece of research normally comprises the following. A review of the literature is followed by the identification of the problem, challenge or issue and this is normally expressed in terms of research questions or similar. A section describing the suitably rigorous research methods used to address these then follows, and the findings/results presented after that. A discussion of the findings/results concludes the piece of research, and it is here that it is evident that there is a contribution to knowledge, because the findings/results are discussed in light of the literature. Rather than simply ‘here are the results’, given the aims and scope of journal, although not a requirement, the article/manuscript usually ends with something that the reader can take from that work and use, in some way, in their own context.


All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. A student is usually listed as principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis.


All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.


JPP requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading.  Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the JPP Author Guidelines to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding, or state that: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Declartion for Competing Interest

JPP encourages authors and reviewers to include a declaration of any competing interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the JPP Reviewer Guidelines and JPP Reviewer Guidelines.

Publication Frequency

Pedagogy | Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran



3 issues per year: January, May, September

JPP make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in our publications. However, JPP, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content.

Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by JPP. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. PKPEL shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to, or arising out of the use of the Content.

Open Access Policy

JPP was one of the all major publishers to embrace the open access mode of free access with licensing allowing liberal reuse of articles. This is an open access journal: all articles will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. To provide open access, this journal has an open access fee (also known as an article publishing charge APC) which needs to be paid by the authors or on their behalf e.g. by their research funder or institution. Permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons user licenses:

Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 
Lets others distribute and copy the article, create extracts, abstracts, and other revised versions, adaptations or derivative works of or from an article (such as a translation), include in a collective work (such as an anthology), text or data mine the article, even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit the author(s), do not represent the author as endorsing their adaptation of the article, and do not modify the article in such a way as to damage the author's honor or reputation.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) 
For non-commercial purposes, lets others distribute and copy the article, and to include in a collective work (such as an anthology), as long as they credit the author(s) and provided they do not alter or modify the article.

The open access publication fee for this journal is $US 45 for for full-length articles, excluding taxes.

JPP provides a number of security-related options that can be used to restrict the journal's contents, and maintain additional information about submissions for auditing purposes.

Additional Site and Article Access Restrictions

  • Users must be registered and log in to view the journal site.
  • Users must be registered and log in to view open access content.
User Registration

Users can register themselves with the journal in one or more of the following roles:

  1. Readers (will receive notifications and be counted as equivalent to a subscriber)
  2. Authors (can submit materials to the journal)
  3. Reviewers (available for reviewing submissions)

Ethics and Responsibility

JPP is committed to upholding the integrity of the work we publish. The value of academic publishing relies on everyone involved behaving ethically. The following points are only intended to give a broad overview and are not exhaustive. We encourage our authors and editors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website.

If you are unsure of a journal-related ethical issue, you might well find the answer in COPE’s wealth of materials, but if you have any questions or concerns please also feel free to contact the Editor of the Journal, or you can email us at jpp@unpam.ac.id.

JPP is committed to:

  • maintaining the editorial independence of journal editors
  • supporting journal editors to run their journals ethically and transparently
  • maintaining an accurate and transparent academic record, including publishing corrections and retractions when necessary

Authors should ensure that:

  • their work is original and written by them
  • their work has not been previously published and has been submitted only to the journal 
  • where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing) the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained
  • their work does not infringe on any rights of others, including privacy rights and intellectual property rights
  • their data is true and not manipulated
  • their data is their own or that they have permission to use data reproduced in their paper
  • any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated on submission of their paper (this would include funding assistance)
  • they adhere to all research ethics guidelines of their discipline, particularly where human or animal subjects are involved
  • they contact the Editor to identify and correct any material errors upon discovery, whether prior or subsequent to publication of their work
  • authorship of the paper is accurately represented, including ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication
Above all, authors should be transparent. For example, if an author is not sure whether her paper is original (for instance, whether it might constitute duplicate publication), she should inform the journal’s editor. If the editor decides it is appropriate to publish, the paper itself should state clearly any potential overlap. For more information, please visit the JPP Author Guidelines.

Reviewers must:

  • maintain the confidentiality of the review process
  • immediately alert their journal editor of any real or potential competing interest that could affect the impartiality of their reviewing and decline to review where appropriate
  • conduct themselves fairly and impartially
  • We are aware, of course, that academics will come from a particular school of thought and/or may have strong ties to a particular interest. All we ask is that reviewers strive to act fairly. If in doubt about whether a conflict exists, a reviewer should be transparent and seek the views of the journal editor.

For more information, please visit the JPP Reviewer Guidelines.

Editors should:

  • maintain and promote consistent ethical policies for their journals
  • oversee and act to enforce those policies as needed in a fair and consistent manner
  • ensure the confidentiality of the review process
  • exercise the highest standards of personal integrity in their work as editor of the journal, recognising and planning for instances where they could have a competing interest or the appearance of a competing interest
  • work with authors, reviewers, and Editorial Board members as necessary to ensure they are sufficiently advised regarding their journals’ ethics and publishing policies and that the journal’s stewardship on ethical matters is fair, unbiased, and timely

For more information, please visit the JPP Editor Guidelines.


Everyone including Editorial Boards

  • We should promote fairness and equality and oppose discrimination
  • We should promote the transparency of and respect for the academic record
  • We should respect the confidentiality of others
  • We should be transparent about real or apparent competing interests

Publication Frequency

Pedagogy : Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran is published three a year (May, June, and september)

Screening For Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the practice of stealing other people's work and representing it as one's own. To prevent this the author is obliged to rewrite each quote from the work of another in his own words and cite the source as a reference.

Pedagogy: Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran prohibits all forms of plagiarism. During the selection process, the plagiarism check will be carried out in two stages. The first stage will be carried out using commercial software while the second stage will be carried out by reviewers. Writers caught doing plagiarism will be given one opportunity to explain themselves. If the editor finds the explanation unsatisfactory, the paper will be rejected and the author will be blacklisted to submit further works. Whenever possible, the author will also be reported to the relevant authorities (eg the Ethics Department where the author works or the associated Professional Association)

Pedagogy: Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran using Turn It In software.


Pedagogy|Jurnal Pengembangan Pembelajaran ini didukung oleh Yayasan Sasmita Jaya Group

Sources of Support

  • Yayasan Sasmita Jaya

Journal History

Jurnal ini diterbitkan oleh Pusat Kajian Pembelajaran & Elearning Universitas Pamulang. Pusat Kajian Pembelajaran & Elearning merupakan lembaga di bawah Rektorat yang diberikan wewenang untuk merencanakan, mengelola, dan mengevaluasi pembelajaran dalam bentuk tatap muka dan elearning yang diselenggarakan di Universitas Pamulang. Didirikan dengan rasional sebagai wadah untuk menyebarluaskan khasanah ilmiah dalam pembelajaran jarak jauh, elearning, blended learning, online learning