News: Reviewers Working Meeting of ITB Journal, 5 February 2014

In order to strengthen the network of reviewers and share important experiences in the process of a scientific journal article review, ITB Journal has organized a Working Meeting of the reviewers  of ITB Journal on Wednesday, February 5, 2014 in the Auditorium of Science and Technology at the East Campus Center. The meeting was attended by 66 active reviewer for the ITB Journal .

The meeting was opened by Prof. Ismunandar as Chief Editor followed by presentations of the three Executive Editors of the ITB Journal. Prof. Edy Soewono as executive editor of the Journal of Mathematical Sciences and Fundamentals has presented about the flow of publication process of scientific articles in the ITB Journal. He stated that the target of the submission process to obtain results of a review from a reviewer is three months, this process is called of the bottle neck which is important part that requires the support and cooperation from the reviewer. Prof. Tjandra Setiadi as Executive Editor of the Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences convey the importance to ITB has journals indexed by ISI Thomson. One of the requirements of the ISI Thomson is a regular publication and at least 6 (six) numbers per year. Therefore, the number of articles submitted allow for J.Eng.Technol.Sci  to add the number of issues and became a pioneer as the first journal in the ITB to be indexed by Thomson ISI . Dr.Ir. Dwi Hendratmo Widyantoro, Executive Editor of the Journal of ICT Research and Applications, shared that the constraints in accelerating the publication of the Journal of ICT. Among these obstacles is the amount of paper that is not worthy, for example there  such a paper submitted to the conference amounted to only 4 pages or even whole thesis is submitted that forced to be rejected before assigned to the reviewer .

The key points are generated from the Working Meeting of the reviewers are as follows:

  1. Proposed a meeting Referee plot for creating benchmark, especially when associated with the status and needs of the journal , so it can be determined what are the standard in reviewing.
  2. Poposed a meeting of the referee  together with the editor to accelerate the review process.
  3. The reviews result should develop the paper , not just stating rejection in the comment that the artice is not worth or bad and rejected paper but informing a good and a satisfactory paper for the publication needs.
  4. Proposal of a proceedings series run by the ITB Journal as Proceedia managed by Elsevier, making it possible for the papers of the international conference organized by ITB,hence those proceedings will be indexed in Scopus .


View my Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.