1. Home
  2. About the Journal
  3. Editorial Policies

Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Kitaba (ISSN 2987-6419) is a journal that publishes articles on the results of research and development in learning Arabic in terms of interdisciplinary aspects such as linguistics, religion, culture, technology, science, and so on. This journal aims to become a superior and internationally reputable intellectual publication medium.

The Scope of the Kitaba journal includes: Applied Linguistics, Arabic Learning Technologies and Media, Linguistic and Literary Studies in Arabic learning, Models of Arabic Education Program management, Psycho-Sociolinguistics in Arabic Learning, Historical and Cultural Studies in Arabic learning, Arabic Training, New Issues in Learning Arabic, and other interdisciplinary studies.

The scope of this journal, in more detail, includes:

  • Arabic learning in general
  • Arabic learning strategies
  • The use of technology in Arabic learning
  • Linguistic studies in Arabic learning
  • Literary studies in Arabic learning
  • Historical and cultural studies in Arabic learning
  • Evaluation and development of Arabic learning curriculum
  • Development of teaching materials and Arabic learning media
  • Implementation of Arabic learning at various levels of education and institutions
  • Models of Arabic Education program management.
  • Development of Arabic proficiency.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Paper submitted in KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning will be reviewed by some expert of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning from several universities in different countries (double-blind review). It will take for about a month to conduct the review. Every paper submitted will be scanned for plagiarism before it is sent to the reviewer.

To be published in this Journal, a paper should meet general criteria:

  • The paper submitted in the journal must be original, unpublished work, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  • Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.
  • Should be a research result or literature studies in Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning field
  • Ideally, interesting to researchers in Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning field and other related disciplines

In general, to be acceptable, a paper should represent an advance in understanding likely to influence thinking in the field. There should be a discernible reason why the work deserves the visibility of publication in KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning rather than the best of the specialist journals.

KITABA Journal reviewers consist of experts and / or researchers specialized in the field of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning, who work professionally by upholding the code of ethics for scientific publications.

After the manuscript is entered, at the initial stage the manuscript will be selected whether the substance of the manuscript is in accordance with the focus and scope of the journal and the originality of the manuscript. If it meets, then the manuscript will go through an internal review process and peer reviewers. The initial evaluation decision of the manuscript is a maximum of four weeks after the manuscript is received by the Editor. 

Furthermore, the peer-review process of KITABA Journal manuscripts by peer reviewers is as follows:

First; Reviewers review manuscripts in accordance with their scientific fields and have the right to transfer manuscripts to other reviewers who are more competent with the approval of the Editor.

Second; The review process uses double blind review, that is, the reviewer does not know the identity of the author, and vice versa.

Third; The review process of one manuscript is carried out by at least one reviewer and the stage process is carried out with the E-Journal system.

Fourth; Reviewers assess the manuscript within a maximum period of 4 (four) weeks since the manuscript is received. The assessment is based on the quality of the substance of the manuscript, among others:

  • Suitability of problems, objectives, theories, methods, and discussions;
  • Clarity of presentation of images, tables and diagrams;
  • The up-to-date of referenced libraries;
  • Data errors and originality of information;
  • Evaluate the integrity of the content of the manuscript;
  • Manuscripts have never been published in other media;
  • Breadth of knowledge and critical thinking of the author;
  • The accuracy of the title with the overall content of the writing.

Fifth; If within that period the manuscript review has not been completed, the reviewer must confirm to the KITABA Journal Editorial Team.

Sixth; During the manuscript review process, the reviewer provides a manuscript assessment through the review checklist form / list available on the electronic journal application. If there are obstacles, reviewers can manually assess the manuscript on the review checklist form (Ms. Word format) sent by the KITABA Journal Editorial Team.

Seventh; The reviewer provides a decision on the manuscript of the review results:

  • Accept Submission (naskah diterima).
  • Revisions Required (naskah perlu direvisi oleh penulis dan dikembalikan lagi ke reviewer).
  • Resubmit for Review (naskah sebaiknya direview oleh reviewer lain).
  • Resubmit Elsewhere (naskah sebaiknya dikirim ke penerbit jurnal yang lain, reviewer menolak secara halus).
  • Decline Submission (naskah ditolak).
  • See Comments (lihat komentar, reviewer menolak secara halus).

Eighth; Reviewers send the manuscript of the review results and review checklist form to the KITABA Journal Editorial Team.

 

Publication Frequency

Kitaba : Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning is regularly published thrice a year in March, July, and November. The editorial team will respond promptly to each article. It is important to note that the official language of the journal is multilingual (English, Arabic, and Indonesian).

 

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.

 

Archiving

 
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal "KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning". It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour 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 KITABA 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. 

Confidentiality

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. 

Promptness

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. 

Confidentiality

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 behaviour 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 behaviour 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.

 

Publication Frequency

KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning is published three times a year in March, July and November.

 

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.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative

  

Budapest Open Access Initiative

 An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While  the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, they are within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Review Guidelines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

  1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is good reason.
  2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
  3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
  4. Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequate or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or were results so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
  5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.

 

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 kitaba@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. Revised on paper or additional material/sentence please block yellow highlighter.

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

 

Plagiarism Check

In the publication, the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning strongly opposes plagiarism on its own merits. The KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning is committed to blocking plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.

Authors must ensure that they have written the original work completely, and if the author has used the work and/or the words of others that have been quoted or quoted appropriately. Papers found with such problems are automatically rejected and the author strongly advised. Also, an important part of the work has not been published. The author also respects the writing in the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning of publication, duplicate, or excessive fraud.

Before the author submits a script to the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning at least to first check the use of plagiarism. When submitting published articles for authenticity checks, the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning recommends the use of Turnitin, Scanner from http://turnitin.com/. Before using Plagiarism Turnitin for the first time, we strongly recommend that authors read the instructions for using this plagiarism detector. The detector plagiarism system for the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning uses and is affiliated with Turnitin.

* Please note that the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning affiliated with Turnitin. *

The article has not been published in other media and does not contain plagiarism. Preferably the author should use reference management software, eg for Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote. The bibliography and reference system for the KITABA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Arabic Learning uses Mendeley or Zotero or Endnote and Turnitin.