Reviewer Guidelines

To improve the quality of journal publications, we invite experts to be the reviewer of Jawda: Journal of Islamic Education Management. Your support and contribution would be valuable and constructive to our publication in ensuring the manuscripts published are of quality and high standard.

Qualifications:

1. The potential reviewers must hold a Master's or Doctoral degree.
2. The research field must conform to teaching and learning Education Management.
3. Have good experience as a reviewer in a scientific journal.

Are you interested to be one of our journal reviewers? Sign up as a reviewer.

In reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer should pay attention to the following:

Presentation
Does the manuscript present a cohesive argument? Are the ideas clearly presented?

Writing
Does the title reflect the manuscript? Is the writing concise and easy to follow?

Length
Which part(s) of the manuscript should be elaborated/ removed /shortened /summarized/ merged?

Title
Does the title reflect the manuscript's content in a concise, clear, and attractive way?

Abstract
Does the abstract satisfy the five elements of research background, objective, method, findings, and contributions/implications?

Introduction
The introduction should briefly provide:

1. The background discourse should indicate a research gap to be fulfilled/ addressed.
2. The resource overview should indicate the results and conclusions of previously published studies in the last ten years to help explain why the current study is of scientific interest, research gaps, originality of the work, hypotheses (if using a quantitative method).
3. The study's objective(s) should be presented in a narrative with effective sentences.
4. The hypothesis development (if using a quantitative method) should be based on a theoretical review and expressed in a one-tailed direction (if possible).

Method

1. The method should thoroughly cover all procedures (not only describing the definition of terms but also how to conduct the research).
2. The study variables, the participants, and instruments (their names, item numbers, and reliability coefficients) should be identified.
3. The data analysis techniques employed should be elaborated.
4. Sufficient information to provide recommendations or guidelines for further research is suggested to ease other researchers in replicating the research with the same result.

Findings

This section describes the outcome of the study. Use tables and figures if needed. The data presented should be processed (not raw data) and be presented in the form of a table or figure with a supportive description. A table, chart, or figure should explain the analyses. The results should be able to answer the research questions or hypotheses.

Discussion

1. The author should give substantial comparisons and contrasts between the current findings and previous relevant/similar studies done by other researchers.
2. The authors should also address the strengths and limitations of their study.
3. The author describes the implications of the research.
4. The authors should address the strengths and limitations of their study. This section should not be a repetition of the results section.

Conclusion

1. The author should present the summary and restatement of the main findings. It should be presented in concise, clear, and compact sentences based on the results and discussions in paragraphs (not in bullets or numbers).
2. The author should also highlight the limitations, implications of the findings, and possible prospective research while stating the findings holistically.