Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal of Islamic education adalah Jurnal tentang Pendidikan Agama Islam dan kependidikan islam. Dengan scope pembahasan sebagai berikut :

  • Kebijakan-kebijkan pengembangan Pendidikan Islam
  • Model-model pengembangan Pendidikan Islam (Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, Madrasah, Sekolah Dasar, dan Perguruan Tinggi Islam)
  • Pengembangan kelembagaan pendidikan islam
  • Metode dan strategi pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Paradigma dan kelembagaan Pendidikan Islam
  • Pengembangan kurikulum Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Pengembangan sumber, media dan bahan pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Pengembangan lingkungan belajar Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Evaluasi pendidikan dan pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Pengendalian mutu lembaga dan pembelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam
  • Pendidikan Agama Islam Inklusif
  • Konseling Pendidikan Islam
  • Manajemen Kelembagaan Pendidikan Islam (Madrasah, Sekolah Dasar. dan Perguruan Tinggi Islam)
  • Filsafat/pemikiran Pendidikan Islam


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Every article sent by the author to Journal of Islamic education will first be checked by editors for the initial evaluation process.
Manuscripts not in accordance with journal criteria based on the results of the editor's evaluation will be rejected. Manuscripts that meet the criteria will be sent to two reviewers using a double-blind method.

The editor then makes a decision based on a recommendation from the reviewer of a number of possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted
The editor has the right to decide which articles will be published.
The editor gives information about the decision to the author.


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

The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal "Journal of Islamic education (JiE)". It is necessary 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 and the publisher.


Publication decisions

The editor of JIE is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor 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 editor 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 behavior 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 behavior 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.


Screening for Plagiarism

The Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) strongly opposes plagiarism on its own merits. The Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) is committed to blocking plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.

The author must ensure that they have written the original work fully, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others who have been quoted or quoted correctly. Papers found with such problems are automatically rejected and the authors strongly recommend it. Also, important parts of the work have not been published. The author also respects writing in the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) from excessive publication, duplicates, or fraud.

Before the author submits the manuscript to the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) at least first examine the use of plagiarism. The manuscript that loaded is the original manuscript and has never been published with a maximum  of 20% similarity check. When submitting articles published for authenticity checks, the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) recommends using Turnitin, Scanner from http://turnitin.com/. Before using Turnitin Plagiarism for the first time, we strongly recommend that the writer read the instructions for using this plagiarism detector. The plagiarism detector system for the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) uses and is affiliated with Turnitin.

* Please note that the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) is affiliated with Turnitin. *

The article has never been published in other media and does not contain plagiarism. Authors should use reference management software, for example Mendeley or Zotero. Bibliography and reference system for the Journal of Journal of Islamic education (JiE) using Mendeley and Zotero


Review Guidelines


1. Put a mark on the wrong part or part that needs to be changed.
2. Put a mark on the right side of the line or the wrong line that needs to be changed.


1. Title: Effectiveness, Specifications, and clarity.
2. Abstract: Complete and describe the essence of the article.
3. Keywords: Describe important concepts of the article.
4. Introduction: Up-to-date, originality, the relevance of topics, compatibility of important reasons of research objects. 
5. Research Methods: Should emphasize procedures and data analysis for empirical studies.
6. Results: Accuracy analysis.
7. Findings: Recent findings, relevance to interrelated researchers, and the contribution of scientific contributions from findings/ideas to the development of science.
8. Conclusion: Logical, valid, concise, and clear.
9. Suggestion: For practical action, the development of new theories, and further/further research.
10. Pictures / Tables: Centrally located, Not cropped, Good quality to see, image/title of the table, referenced in capital letters
11.  Bibliography: The latest degrees and references to the main book sources and journals or scientific researchers . Rules: minimum 80% of journals or scientific researchers; reference issues maximum of the past 10 years; minimum number of  sources 20.

Complete Manuscript Review Process:

1. Writing: Is the script easy to follow, that is, has a clear logical and organizational development?
2. Is the script concise and easy to understand? Every part that has to be reduced,
3. Removed / expanded / added?
4. Pay attention if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are only a few places that aren't properly spoken or correct, make a note to tell the author of certain places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select one or two examples if necessary - don't try and edit them all).
5. Abbreviations: Used wisely and arranged so that the reader will have no trouble remembering what the abbreviations represent.
6. Follow the style, format, and other journal rules.
7. Quotations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.

Decision Category:

Publish: No Need for Revision
Minor: Revisions can be made by the Editor-In-Chief or those who help
Major: Revisions can only be made by the author
Rejected: Not scientific or too much


Revision Guidelines

The paper that has received the results of the review is expected to be immediately revised to adjust the suggestions and questions that exist in the review results. The author is given no later than 15 days to revise his paper counted since the submission of the review results. If at that time the author does not upload the revised paper, then the paper will not be refused to be published (reject). Renewal time extensions can be obtained in accordance with strong demand and reason. The revised paper is further uploaded to Journal website and also sent via email jie@uin-malang.ac.id.

Following the provisions of the revised paper in Journal :

  1. When a reviewer gives comment on paper (in the comment box), the writer asked to directly reply to that comment box. The answer from the author can be Information that has been done revision or reason/argumentation if the author is not willing to revise for some reason (please can be submitted in the comments field already available briefly and details).

  2. Attached sample of revision process paper in Journal to facilitate revision process by the author.