Peer Review Process

The peer review process in JIEM (Journal of Education and Islamic Moderation) serves as a vital mechanism to ensure the academic integrity, originality, and scholarly quality of each manuscript. Through this process, reviewers provide constructive feedback that assists the editorial team in making publication decisions and helps authors enhance the clarity, rigor, and contribution of their work.

All manuscripts submitted online to JIEM first undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial board to assess their relevance to the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with formatting and style guidelines, and originality through plagiarism screening. Manuscripts that meet these preliminary requirements are then forwarded to the peer review stage.

JIEM employs a peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to ensure an objective and fair evaluation.

The assigned reviewers receive an official invitation via email containing the manuscript’s title, abstract, and a link to the journal’s online review system. Reviewers are expected to log in, confirm their willingness to review, download the manuscript, and submit their evaluations—including detailed comments and a final recommendation—through the system. The standard review period is approximately two to four weeks, depending on the complexity of the manuscript and the reviewers’ availability.

Following the completion of the review process, the editor compiles and communicates the reviewers’ feedback to the author for revision and resubmission, if required. Manuscripts that successfully pass the peer review and editorial assessment will be accepted for publication and presented in English to ensure broader international accessibility.

Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

Timeliness
Reviewers who are unable to evaluate a manuscript or complete the review within the given timeframe should promptly inform the editor and decline the assignment.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use any part of the manuscript for personal purposes without explicit authorization from the editor.

Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively and professionally. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate; evaluations should be based on academic merit, supported by clear reasoning and evidence.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers are expected to identify any relevant literature that has not been cited by the authors and report to the editor any substantial similarities or overlaps between the reviewed manuscript and other published works.

Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest, including financial, institutional, or collaborative relationships with the authors or organizations involved in the research. They must avoid reviewing manuscripts where such conflicts may compromise their impartiality.

In maintaining a transparent, fair, and high-quality review process, JIEM upholds the principles of academic integrity, confidentiality, and scholarly objectivity, ensuring that every published article contributes meaningfully to the advancement of education and Islamic moderation.