Arsya Insight Journal of Teaching and Learning is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly integrity and quality. All submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure academic excellence, originality, and relevance.

1. Initial Desk Review

• Upon submission, all manuscripts are first evaluated by the Managing Editor/Editor-in-Chief.

• The initial screening assesses whether the paper aligns with the journal's Focus and Scope, adheres to the author guidelines, and meets basic academic writing standards.

• Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using similarity-checking software (e.g., Turnitin). Papers with an overall similarity index exceeding 20% will be returned for revision or rejected outright.

2. Peer Review Method (Double-Blind Peer Review)

• This journal operates a Double-Blind Peer Review process:

  • The identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept strictly anonymous throughout the process.

  • Authors must ensure their submitted manuscript is fully anonymized (removing author names, affiliations, and self-identifying references).

3. Reviewer Assignment & Evaluation

• Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two (2) independent peer reviewers who are experts in the relevant subject area.

• Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • Originality, novelty, and scientific contribution.

  • Methodological rigor and theoretical framework.

  • Clarity of presentation and structure.

  • Practical implications for teaching and learning.

• Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluation within 2 to 3 weeks.

4. Editorial Decision

Based on the detailed reports and recommendations provided by the reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor will make one of the following decisions:

1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted for publication without any further changes.

2. Revisions Required (Minor Revisions): The author must address specific minor comments within a specified timeframe (usually 1–2 weeks). The editor will review the revised version.

3. Resubmit for Review (Major Revisions): The manuscript requires significant revisions (e.g., additional analysis, rewriting sections). The revised paper will be sent back to the original or new reviewers for a second round of review.

4. Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to major methodological flaws, lack of novelty, or irrelevance to the journal's scope.

5. Revision & Final Approval

• Authors receiving a request for revision must submit their revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response letter detailing how each reviewer's comment was addressed.

• The Editor-in-Chief retains the ultimate authority for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of any submission.

Review Process Flowchart (Ringkasan Alur):

1. Submission $\rightarrow$

2. Desk Screening & Plagiarism Check $\rightarrow$

3. Double-Blind Peer Review (2 Reviewers) $\rightarrow$

4. Editorial Decision (Accept / Revise / Reject) $\rightarrow$

5. Revision by Author (if applicable) $\rightarrow$

6. Final Acceptance & Production.