Peer Review Guideline
Before Accepting the Review Invitation
Please consider the following questions before accepting or declining a review invitation:
- Is your area of expertise relevant to the manuscript?
Your expertise must align with the manuscript topic to ensure a high-quality and informed evaluation. - Do you have any potential conflict of interest?
If there is any financial, institutional, professional, or personal conflict, please disclose it to the Editor immediately. - Do you have sufficient time to complete the review?
Reviewers are expected to submit their review within the specified deadline. Timely review is essential to avoid delays in the editorial process. - Respond promptly.
Whether accepting or declining, please respond to the invitation as soon as possible.
If declining, kindly suggest alternative qualified reviewers, if possible.
Review Comments
The editor relies on your review to make an informed decision regarding the manuscript. Therefore:
- Reviews must be constructive, objective, and evidence-based.
- Comments should be written politely and professionally.
- Avoid personal remarks or language that may reveal your identity.
- The review must adhere to the double-blind principle (do not include identifying information).
- Clearly distinguish between:
- Comments for the Author
- Confidential comments for the Editor (if applicable)
Your comments should clearly explain the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript so that both the author and editor can understand your evaluation.
Reviewers Checklist
When reviewing a manuscript, please consider the following aspects:
Overall Assessment
- Is the manuscript original and free from plagiarism?
- Does it offer novelty and innovation?
- Does it provide significant academic contribution to Islamic education studies?
- Is it relevant to the aims and scope of KJIE?
Title and Abstract
- Is the title clear and representative of the content?
- Does the abstract accurately summarize objectives, methods, results, and conclusions?
Introduction
- Are the research problems clearly stated?
- Is the literature review adequate and up-to-date?
- Are research gaps properly identified?
Methodology
- Is the research design appropriate?
- Are methods clearly described and replicable?
- Are ethical considerations addressed?
- Are statistical or analytical methods correctly applied?
Results and Discussion
- Are results clearly presented?
- Are findings logically interpreted?
- Does the discussion relate findings to existing literature?
- Are claims supported by data?
Conclusion
- Are conclusions supported by the results?
- Does the study provide theoretical or practical implications?
Language and Structure
- Is the manuscript clearly written and grammatically sound?
- Is the structure coherent and well-organized?
References
- Are references relevant and recent?
- Are citations properly formatted?
- Is there any indication of excessive self-citation?
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
- If you suspect plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns, immediately inform the Editor and provide supporting evidence where possible.
- Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.
- Do not share, discuss, or use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal advantage.
- Do not request citation of your own work unless scientifically justified.
The review process strictly follows COPE ethical standards.
Final Recommendation
At the end of your review, please select one of the following recommendations:
- Accept without revision
- Accept with minor revision
- Major revision required
- Reject
The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board will consider all reviewer comments and recommendations before making the final decision. If necessary, an additional reviewer may be appointed or further revisions requested prior to the final decision. The final decision rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief of Khalifa: Journal of Islamic Education.








