Peer Review Process
Khalifa: Journal of Islamic Education is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes a rigorous peer review process. Peer review is an evaluation of the submitted paper by two or more experts with similar competence to the author. Its purpose is to determine the manuscript’s suitability for publication. This method is employed to maintain quality standards and ensure the credibility of published articles. The peer review process in Khalifa: Journal of Islamic Education proceeds in nine steps, as follows:
1. Submission of Manuscript
The corresponding or submitting author submits the manuscript via the online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS).
2. Editorial Office Assessment
The submitted manuscript is first assessed by the editor to check its alignment with the journal’s focus and scope. The composition and formatting are evaluated against the Author Guidelines. At this stage, the minimum quality requirements are assessed, including the identification of any major methodological flaws. Manuscripts that pass this step are checked using Turnitin to measure similarity and ensure originality before being sent to reviewers.
3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether the manuscript is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant. If not, the manuscript may be rejected without further review.
4. Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor invites reviewers who are considered suitable based on expertise, research interests, and absence of conflicts of interest. The journal employs a double-blind peer review, meaning that the reviewers do not know the authors’ identities, and the authors do not know the reviewers’ identities. Manuscripts are sent to reviewers anonymously.
5. Response to Invitations
Reviewers evaluate invitations based on their expertise, availability, and potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers may accept or decline an invitation, and may suggest alternatives if they decline. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality, disclose potential conflicts of interest, and provide fair, objective, and constructive evaluations.
6. Review Conducted
Reviewer allocate time to read the manuscript thoroughly. If major issues are identified early, the manuscript may be rejected. Otherwise, reviewers prepare a detailed, point-by-point evaluation and submit their recommendations: accept, reject, or request revisions (minor or major). The average duration of the peer review process is approximately 6–8 weeks, depending on the complexity of the manuscript and reviewer availability.
7. Evaluation of Reviews
The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor consider all returned reviews before making a final decision. If the reviews differ significantly, an additional reviewer may be invited to provide another opinion.
8. Communication of Decision
The editor sends a decision letter to the author, including anonymous reviewer comments. Reviewers are also informed of the outcome of their evaluations.
9. Final Steps
If accepted, the manuscript proceeds to the copy-editing stage. If revisions are required, the author receives constructive feedback. The revised manuscript is resubmitted to the editor. Reviewers may be asked to re-evaluate the revised version. Once the editor is satisfied with the revisions, the manuscript is accepted and published online in a freely downloadable PDF format. The peer review process at the Khalifa Journal of Islamic Education strictly follows the ethical guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), thereby ensuring integrity, transparency, and credibility in scientific publication.
