About the Journal


  • Contact
  • Peer Reviewer

About the Journal 

  • Physics Learning Model
  • Development of Physics Learning Media
  • Physics Learning Method
  • Physics Experimental Research
  • Qualitative research
  • Quantitative research
  • Development of Learning Materials
  • Learning Evaluation
  • Literary Studies

The Physics Education Journal aims to promote creativity and innovation in physics education to face global challenges such as education in the era of disruption, internet of things in education, HOTS-based education, STEAM Education, blended learning, digital literacy education, digital classes, and other educational innovations.


Peer Review Process

Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika has a policy in the review process are:

Every submitted paper will be reviewed by at least two peer-reviewers.

  1. Reviewers know the identity of the author, and the author also knows the identity of the reviewer (Peer Reviews).
  2. Reviewing process will consider novelty, objectivity, method, scientific impact, conclusion, and references.

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 Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika the duration of the review process can be up to 3 months.

Using Peer Reviews

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika is published twice a year in two issues, Number 1 and 2. The scheduled for publication are on Febuary and September

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to the Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika  will be screened for plagiarism using the Turnitin plagiarism detection tool. The Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika will immediately reject papers that lead to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting an article to a reviewer, the article is first checked for similarities/plagiarism tools, by a member of the editorial team. Papers submitted to the Jurnal Omicron : Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika must have a similarity level of less than 20% (Except for Bibliography), and the similarity value of each source is not more than 3%.

Plagiarism is the disclosure of another person's thoughts or words as if they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or for not properly citing sources. Plagiarism can take a variety of forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing someone else's work. In order to accurately assess whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

An author may actually copy the work of another author- by copying verbatim, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledging or citing the original source. This practice can be detected by comparing the original source with the manuscript/work that is suspected of plagiarism.
Substantial copying implies an author to reproduce a large part of another author, without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The term substantial can be understood in terms of both quality and quantity, which is often used in the context of Intellectual Property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.
Paraphrasing involves taking an idea, word, or phrase from a source and putting it together into a new sentence in writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not quote correctly or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is a more difficult form to identify.

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

Our Publication Ethics are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates 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 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 conflicts of interest

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

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.


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.


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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that 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.

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.

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. 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, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

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 and Contributorship of the Article

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 on 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.

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 work

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.

Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey the ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal, ethical clearance from an association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Please fill in the Statement of Ethical clearance to be included as an attachment file when submission (submit articles)

Review Guidelines


Does the paper relate to a cohesive argument? Are the ideas clearly presented?


Does the title characterize the manuscript? Is the writing concise and easy to follow?


What portions of the paper should be expanded? Removed? Condensed? Summarized? Combined?


Does the title concise, omitting terms that are implicit and, where possible, be a statement of the main result or conclusion presented in the manuscript? Abbreviations should be avoided within the title.


Does the abstract consist of 1) aim of the study; 2) method; 3) result or finding; and 4) conclusion?


Clearly describing and respectively:

  • The background of the study;
  • State of the art, relevant research to justify the novelty of the manuscript;
  • Gap analysis, novelty statement;
  • Hypothesis or problem statement (optional);
  • Approach to resolve the problem; and
  • The aim of the study.


  • The method is written clearly, so then other researchers can replicate the experiment or research with the same result;
  • Not only describe the definition of terms but also describe how to conduct the research;
  • Describe the location, participant, research instrument, and data analysis;

Result and discussion

  • The data presented has been processed (not raw data) into a table or figure and given a supportive description which easy to follow.
  • The result was related to the original questions or objectives outlined in the Introduction section.
  • The author describes the result of the study as consistent with what other investigators have reported or there any differences.
  • The author provides interpretation scientifically for each of the results or findings presented.
  • The author describes the implications of the research.
  • The author describes the limitations of the research or drawbacks to the method or position.
  • The author describes further needs/areas for research or expansion of ideas.


Consist of:

  • Answer the objectives of the research;
  • Implication or recommendation (optional);
  • Written in a paragraph, not in bullet/numbering.


This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Publication: 00 (IDR)
If this paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.

*) If you do not have funds to pay such fees, you will have an opportunity to waive each fee. We do not want fees to prevent the publication of worthy work.



Creative Commons License 

Jurnal Elementaria Edukasia is currently licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)