Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

JTEV (Jurnal Teknik Elektro dan Vokasional) is a journal of research results, articles, or book reviews in accordance with the format and conditions provided. This Journal Focuses on fields of Electrical Engineering and Electrical Engineering Vocational such as:

  • Electrical Energy Conversion
  • Industrial Automation Engineering
  • Electrical Power System
  • Electrical Engineering Education and vocational
  • Development of Electrical Engineering Learning Models
  • Development of Electrical Engineering Learning Media
  • Application of Electrical Engineering Learning Methods
  • Development of Trainers for Electrical Engineering Learning
  • Development of ICT Based Learning
  • E-Learning / Blended Learning / Mobile Learning in Electrical Engineering

JTEV (Jurnal Teknik Elektro dan Vokasional) merupakan jurnal hasil penelitian, artikel, atau resensi buku sesuai dengan format dan ketentuan yang disediakan yang fokus pada bidang terkait Teknik Elektro dan Vokasional seperti: 

  • Konversi Energi Listrik
  • Teknik Otomasi Industri
  • Sistem Tenaga Listrik
  • Pendidikan Teknik Elektro/Listrik
  • Pengembangan Model Pembelajaran Teknik Listrik
  • Pengembangan Media Pembelajaran Teknik Listrik
  • Penerapan Metode Pembelajaran Teknik Listrik
  • Pengembangan Trainer untuk Pembelajaran Teknik Listrik
  • Pengembangan Pembelajaran Berbasis ICT
  • E-Learning/Blended Learning/Mobile Learning Bidang Teknik Listrik

Section Policies


  • Checked Open Submissions
  • Checked Indexed
  • Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

JTEV reviewing policies are:

  • Every submitted paper will be reviewed by at least two peer-reviewers.
  • Reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers (double blind review method).
  • Reviewing process will consider:  
    • Ethics: The author has ensured research work and publication ethics.
    • Relevance to the scope of the journal.
    • novelty, objectivity, and scientific impact
    • Theoretical Framework: The theoretical framework is clearly presented and explained.
    • Problem Statement: The problem statement is clearly presented and explained.
    • Research Question: The research question is clearly presented and explained.
    • Research Methods: The research methods are appropriate and clearly presented.
    • Results: The results are adequately, clearly presented and discussed.

    The reviewers recommend with an overall rating:

    • accept
    • neither accept nor reject: minor revisions needed
    • neither accept nor reject: major revisions needed
    • reject

    The reviewer will be involved if the recommendations are contradictory. The final decision is made by the editor in chief.

    Please note that editorial amendments regarding changes to the content of this website and submitted articles are reserved.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed JTEV is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

 Publication Decisions

The editor of JTEV (Jurnal Teknik Elektro dan Vokasional) is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair Play

An editor at any time evaluate 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 own 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.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an 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 behaviour 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement 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 of the Paper

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.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.'

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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 works

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.