🎓 GRADUATE FORUM 2026

Many rejections are better than no submission: lessons learned from publishing in International Journal

Many rejections are better than no submission: lessons learned from publishing in International Journal

By Hasnan Yasin

Many academics find it not easy to publish their papers in a reputable journal, including in internationally indexed journals. Some even consider publishing mostly in local-indexed journals since they think that it is easier to get accepted to some extent. This may be because of the dynamic behind publishing articles in a reputable journal. I had tried submitting my manuscripts to reputable journals many times before it was accepted by one. What I learned is that publishing is not just about writing quality papers, but also about finding a suitable journal to disseminate it. This brief writing is my reflection I noted from publishing in a reputable journal.

To begin with, I start with the writing quality. The writing must be of international standard. Even though specific guidelines are usually provided by each journal, common acceptable academic writing standards must be upheld. For example, the common structure used is IMRaD (short for Introduction, Method, Result, and Discussion), some journals also preferred it with literature review subject to the journal’s guideline; the stylistic convention and formatting needs to follow certain style such as APA (most common style I found), MLA, or other styles; ethical standards should be strictly considered and explicitly stated, especially for research involving human participations; the significance of the study must be presented; and the limitation of the study needs to be stated. This is just the starting point. The next one is related to selecting suitable journals to publish.

Beyond the writing itself, browsing and filtering journals can be very substantial and useful. I learned that choosing a journal is not just about looking at the name of the journal. It is beyond that. Paying attention to some points of a journal such as the scope, metrics, index, and even editors can be enlightening. The scope of the manuscript prepared must be in line with the journal scope. This can be seen from the stated aims and scopes and also from the published articles from previous volumes. Metrics is also important, especially if you are concerned much about the average time of the editorial process and the citation metrics. Indexing is another important point to notice in order to make sure that the journal is discoverable and credible. Lastly, getting to know the journal editors can be useful since they are in charge of overseeing the publication process. After carefully considering and finding a match to these points, submission is good to go.

Do not worry about the speed. Expect different length of editorial processes from different journals. Some journal editors have longer time to process your articles; others have shorter time. My first publication took me only three months from submission to its online publication. My second and the rest took a lot longer than that and are still in editorial process until this reflection is published. The average time of waiting is usually presented in the journal metrics. The metric usually portrays the fact based on previous year data. If the process takes a lot longer than what it says in the metrics, try emailing the editors or the editor assistance for clarification.

However, sometimes one try is not enough. That is why being tenacious is good in publishing an article. You have to expect that your first submission will not be great and rejection can be something you can find along the way. This does not necessarily mean that your article is not good enough, but it has not just found its place yet. I do not encourage you to submit one manuscript to many journals, instead, I encourage you to submit it again after one rejection. You also have to be reflective about what could possibly be improved after the rejection. Some editors sometimes include notes you can consider before submitting it again.

Be aware that the comments from reviewers and editors are not always nice but open spaces for learning and improvement. You can always take the comments from the reviewer and the editors as a learning opportunity for you. In my case, for example, since I wrote about financial literacy from large-scale educational assessment data, and my background is not economic, I learned some frameworks I used as lenses of my study. I learn about financial socialization and behavioral economics. Theories I have not heard before. This was initiated by the comments I received from the reviewers and editors. These comments are mostly constructive. The more comments you get the more opportunities you get for learning.

Finally, from publishing in international journals, I have learned that writing quality, journal selection, speed and timelines, tenacity and rejection, reviewer comments and growth are important points to consider in publishing and article. My final two cents is many rejections are better than no submissions. It may take time, but it is worth waiting.

by Bambang Sumintono

Insights Gained from the Wasathiya Course: Best Paper Award at a Scholarly Conference

Insights Gained from the Wasathiya Course: Best Paper Award at a Scholarly Conference

By Deshinta Puspa Ayu Dwi Argaswari

Learning about Wasathiya during my first semester was challenging for me. I remember telling my friends from the PhD in Education Batch 4 and Kelurahan LPDP-UIII several times that I need their help in understanding this course. Fortunately, the classroom discussions turned out to be far more open, warm, and thoughtful than I had imagined. Pak Andar, the lecturer once challenged me to reflect on Wasathiya from a Christian perspective as I am Christian studying Wasathiya. I began conducting a document analysis to explore how Christian schools informally implement values of moderation and tolerance.

I then decided to present the paper on International Conference on Islam and Education (ICONIE), organized by UIN K.H. Abdurrahman Wahid Pekalongan in collaboration with SEAMEO QITEP in Language. I saw it as an opportunity to share my paper and show that, deep within Christian education and curriculum, there are values aligned with Wasathiya and religious moderation. We are all working toward the same goal: nurturing harmony and diversity in this world.

At first, I was afraid. I was the only non-Muslim participant in the conference, and I worried that my topic might be considered sensitive. Yet the phrase, “If not now, then when? If not you, then who?” gave me courage. I felt that this was a responsibility to spread the essence of Wasathiya, especially to educators who would later pass these values on to their students. Hopefully, it would become knowledge that continues to benefit others.

Finally, I presented my paper. To my surprise, the audience warmly welcomed the perspective. Many participants found the paper and analysis interesting because it offered a new way of understanding Wasathiya/moderation. What began as an experience where I knew almost no one gradually turned into meaningful connections with many people. I was deeply inspired by the participants’ passion for learning, especially because many of them were no longer young, yet their enthusiasm remained extraordinary.

The conference itself was also enjoyable. I met Ajeng, an MA student from the Faculty of Education, and Babangida Muhammad, a student from Faculty of Islamic Studies. I had initially thought I was the only participant from UIII. I also met students and lecturers from Universitas Muhammadiyah Bekasi, who were incredibly kind and help me during the presentation.

Beyond presenting my own work, I gained valuable insights from the conference sessions. I met Ms. Van and Ms. Trang, speakers from Vietnam, who discussed art-based culture in language education. Their presentation reminded me of Fani’s (friend of mine in UIII) dissertation topic on culturally responsive pedagogy in Mathematics. Today, issues surrounding culture and humanity in education are becoming increasingly important. I was questioning ‘Why?”

I found part of the answer in Bu Itje Chodidjah’s lecture. She explained that although technology provides great power and convenience, the deeper meaning of education can gradually fade if humanity is neglected. Education is fundamentally about human relationships, emotions, and meaningful connections. Ethics help guide its direction. This is where humanity and culture play essential roles in supporting education today.

Of course, clashes and differences may arise throughout the process. Yet this is precisely where Wasathiya/moderation becomes important: bridging knowledge and humanity just as it bridges religions and diversity.

In the end, the conference became deeply meaningful for me. What I initially viewed as merely an opportunity to present my paper assignment turned into a transformative experience. I met people who were passionately fighting for education in their own ways. Their spirit illuminated the moments we shared, and our discussions broadened my understanding of education, culture, and humanity.

During the closing session, I was announced as the Best Presenter of the conference — not second or third place, but First Best Presenter among approximately 400 offline participants. Hearing my name and my paper title echo throughout the ballroom was unforgettable. At that moment, I was like ‘Thank God, I made the ‘Wasathiya’ being heard’. Even though this is not a topic that I fully mastered, I learned and grew through the challenges along the way.

I am also deeply thankful to my home university, Sampoerna University for its continuous support. I am equally grateful to Faculty of Education, UIII for giving me the opportunity to learn so many things. The faculty has guided me to courageously step into new experiences and continue learning, even at moments when I was afraid. My lecturers have been incredibly supportive throughout this journey. Pak Bambang always encouraged me to write and keep moving forward. Pak Andar consistently challenged me to explore more deeply and to embrace uniqueness in my work. My supervisor, Bu Destina, encouraged me to go beyond and enrich my knowledge. This is what students truly need: opportunities to learn not only inside the classroom, but also beyond it.

by Bambang Sumintono

Learning Beyond the Classroom: A Reflection on Research, Collaboration, and Academic Growth

Learning Beyond the Classroom: A Reflection on Research, Collaboration, and Academic Growth

By Nofi Maria K. and Munaya Nikma R.

The publication of our article in a Scopus Q2 journal became one of the most meaningful experiences in our journey as PhD students at the Faculty of Education, Universitas Islam Internasional Indonesia. Looking back, this achievement was not merely about seeing our names published in an international journal. More importantly, it became part of a meaningful learning journey that allowed us to see more clearly how academic work is shaped through collaboration, responsibility, persistence, and continuous reflection. This journey began when our academic advisor, Dr. Destina Wahyu Winarti, invited us to participate as research assistants in a research project under RKI (Riset Kolaborasi Indonesia) scheme with UNNES (Universitas Negeri Semarang) and USK (Universitas Syiah Kuala). At the beginning, we imagined our role mainly as assisting with several technical aspects of the project. However, throughout the process, we were given opportunities to become involved in various stages of the research activities, including preparation meetings, collaborative discussions, workshop implementation, data management, as well as manuscript and project outcome development. Through these experiences, we realized that research is an interconnected process requiring communication, coordination, and sustained commitment over time.

As PhD students who were still learning to navigate academic writing and publication, these experiences became important spaces for learning. Many things that initially felt unfamiliar gradually became easier to understand because we were actively involved in the process rather than only learning about it theoretically. Being involved directly in these activities helped us realize that manuscript writing cannot be separated from the broader research journey itself. The discussions, collaborative activities, exchanges of ideas, and revisions throughout the project eventually became important foundations in shaping the manuscript and preparing it for publication. Through the activities, we learned to explore potential ideas and research design opportunities to write and publish within our research project topic, as reflected in the article we eventually published.

Our published article discusses the development of research related to socio-scientific issues in education, specifically within the science and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education. We identified several major themes related to socio-scientific issues, including sustainability, climate change, and social justice. Our findings then highlight the needs of interdisciplinary practices in education to promote socio-scientific context in the teaching and learning process, such as through STEM Education. Furthermore, we found that teacher training for socio-scientific contexts has become prevalent in recent years. These insights have informed one of the aims of our research project, which is to hold workshops for teachers to enhance their understanding of socio-scientific issues and integrate these concepts into classroom learning activities. By aligning our research outcomes with the goals of the RKI project, we hope that our work will extend beyond theoretical discourse and written publication to create meaningful impacts on teachers and students as key stakeholders in education.

Throughout the writing process, we gradually learned how collaborative academic writing is built through different roles and responsibilities. Under the guidance of our lecturer as the first author, we contributed to various stages of manuscript development, including conceptual discussions, exploring research gaps and building research novelty, deciding on the appropriate methodology, developing the literature review, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, drafting, editing, and revision processes. Although our roles differed, this collaboration taught us that meaningful academic work is always built collectively. Every contribution, regardless of its form, becomes an important part of interconnected contributions that support one another.

One of the most meaningful aspects of this journey was the trust and guidance given by Dr. Destina Wahyu Winarti throughout the entire process. For us, being trusted to participate directly in a collaborative international publication process became a valuable learning opportunity. Beyond research and writing techniques, we also gained valuable insights from observing how academic collaboration is managed, how ideas are negotiated through discussion, and how scholarly work requires both intellectual openness and consistency. Looking back, many of the things we understand today about academic writing were not learned instantly, but developed gradually through continuous practice, feedback, and shared learning experiences throughout the project. Through revising arguments and improving clarity, we realized that academic writing is not only about presenting knowledge, but also about communicating ideas responsibly and coherently.

The revision stage also became an important part of this learning experience. Feedback from the review process helped us recognize aspects of the manuscript that still required clarification and improvement. Through this process, we realized that even small revisions can strengthen the coherence and quality of academic writing. We realize that the review process also taught us to be accountable for the arguments we presented, particularly to address reviewers’ feedback carefully and comprehensively. More importantly, the experience reminded us that feedback should not always be viewed as criticism to be avoided, but as part of the academic conversation that helps sharpen arguments, improve clarity, and strengthen the overall quality of scholarly work. Beyond the review process itself, effective communication between authors and journal editors also plays an important role in achieving successful publication. As authors, we sometimes need to actively monitor the ongoing review and submission process to ensure timely correspondence.

More than the publication outcome itself, this journey gradually changed the way we view research and academic work as graduate students. Research no longer felt distant or intimidating, but instead became something that can be learned progressively through involvement, collaboration, and sustained practice. Some meaningful lessons emerged through ordinary moments throughout the process, including meetings, collaborative revisions, and responding to feedback. Finally, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to our supervisor, Dr. Destina Wahyu Winarti, and collaborators who guided us throughout this journey. Their trust and mentorship became valuable parts of our academic learning journey. This experience also reminded us that there is still much for us to continue learning throughout our academic journey. As science and research continue to evolve, we as students and researchers (regardless of the expertise area we worked on) should cultivate curiosity, maintain a lifelong learner mindset, and develop a consistent habit of reading to broaden our knowledge and perspectives. We hope this reflection can serve not only as a record of our experience, but also as a reminder that every academic journey develops gradually through persistence, collaboration, and continuous learning.

by Bambang Sumintono

From Dissertation to Chapter: On Empathy, Burnout, and Meaningful Academic Supervision

From Dissertation to Chapter: On Empathy, Burnout, and Meaningful Academic Supervision

By:  Syifa Mufiedatussalam

I never expected that writing an academic book chapter would teach me something so personal. But looking back now, I think that is exactly what happened.

The chapter is titled “The Well-Being of Early Childhood Teachers in Indonesia: Promoting Empathy to Mitigate Burnout,” published in Springer’s Handbook of Teacher’s Voice in Global South. It began, like most academic work, with questions: how are early childhood teachers in Indonesia actually doing, and does empathy play a role in protecting them from burnout? These questions shaped the structure of the writing, the first calling for a clear picture of teachers’ realities, the second asking us to look at how empathy, burnout, and well-being relate to one another. Both required careful thinking. But the process of getting there required something else entirely.

It required someone like Assoc. Prof. Charyna Ayu Rizkyanti.

Working with her has been, and continues to be, one of the great privileges of my doctoral journey. She brought clarity when I was tangled in my own thinking, and steadiness when the process felt overwhelming. She consistently offered a genuine care for me. She asked how I was. She creates space for being heard. She can be a mom, supervisor, and also a friend. She is a mom who sense when my tiredness before I said so. She offered warmth without me having to ask for it. But she can be a strict supervisor, who pay attention to the details. She pushed me to be more precise, to think more critically. When she became a friend, she can be a safe place where I could say anything. And I know that these are not something every doctoral student gets to experience. I do not take it for granted.

What strikes me now is how much this mirrors what the chapter is arguing. The study found that burnout among early childhood teachers is real and significant. The emotional exhaustion, the feeling of becoming distant from the work, and the loss of personal accomplishment can quietly accumulate over time. Surprisingly, it also found that empathy acts as a buffer. When people feel genuinely understood, they are seen as whole human beings. Then, something protective happens. Their well-being holds.

I lived this while writing about it. The PhD is a long journey, and it is not always easy. There are stretches where the reading feels endless, where the writing refuses to come. I went through all of that. But I did not experience burnout. And this all because I am accompanied by Mom Charyna, who made practice empathy every day in life.

Alhamdulillah. I mean that with my whole heart.

The chapter also challenged us methodologically. The mediation model we constructed supported that empathy does not merely coexist with well-being. Empathy actively carries some of the weight that burnout would otherwise place on a teacher’s shoulders. Arriving at that argument cleanly took many conversations and many revisions that finally end up with publication.

For the early childhood teachers this chapter is about, I hope this work revealed the real conditions. I hope it reaches people who have the power to make their conditions better. And for other PhD students who may be reading this: the quality of the relationship you have with your supervisor matters. It shapes not just the research, but you. If you are fortunate enough to have someone who sees you as a person first, hold onto that. It is rarer than it should be.

Assoc. Prof. Charyna Ayu Rizkyanti — thank you for being all of it. The supervisor, the mother figure, the friend. Thank you for the late nights and the honest feedback and the space to be myself. This chapter has your fingerprints all over it, in the best possible way.

by Bambang Sumintono