Review Process Policy

Al-Mubtadi: Jurnal Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah is committed to ensuring that all submitted manuscripts are evaluated through a fair, objective, confidential, and academically rigorous review process. The journal applies consistent review standards to maintain the quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of published research in elementary and Islamic elementary education.

1. Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the editorial team to determine their suitability for the journal's aims and scope, compliance with author guidelines, originality, basic academic quality, and adherence to publication ethics requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected before external peer review. Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment may proceed to the peer-review stage.

2. Peer Review

Manuscripts considered suitable for review are evaluated by qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area. Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, research methods, quality of analysis, clarity of presentation, relevance of references, contribution to the field, and validity of its conclusions.

The journal uses a Peer-Review process. The review model must be applied consistently and communicated clearly to authors and reviewers.

3. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, relevant research experience, and ability to provide an independent and constructive assessment. The editorial team seeks to avoid conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers.

Reviewers must disclose any circumstances that could compromise their impartiality and decline assignments when an actual or potential conflict of interest cannot be appropriately managed.

4. Review Criteria and Recommendations

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, evidence-based, and constructive comments. Their assessments should help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts and assist editors in making informed editorial decisions.

Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. These recommendations are advisory; the final editorial decision rests with the editor or another authorized editorial representative.

5. Revision and Editorial Decisions

Authors may be asked to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer and editor comments. Revised manuscripts should include a clear response to each substantive comment and indicate the changes made.

When necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers. The editor will consider the review reports, the authors' responses, and the manuscript's overall quality before making a final decision.

6. Timeliness

The journal seeks to conduct the review process within a reasonable period. Review timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the need for revisions, and the availability of suitable subject experts.

The editorial team will make reasonable efforts to communicate significant delays and keep authors informed of the status of their submissions.

7. Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript content or use information obtained through the review process for personal or professional advantage.

Manuscripts and related correspondence may only be shared with individuals directly involved in the editorial process or where disclosure is required by applicable policies or law.

8. Ethical Conduct and Misconduct

Editors and reviewers must follow the journal's publication ethics policies, including requirements concerning conflicts of interest, confidentiality, plagiarism, research integrity, and responsible use of artificial intelligence tools.

Any suspected ethical concerns identified during the review process will be assessed in accordance with the journal's relevant policies.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should submit a reasoned explanation through the journal's official contact channel. Appeals should identify specific factual errors, procedural irregularities, or substantive concerns relevant to the decision.

The editorial team will assess appeals fairly and may seek additional independent advice when appropriate. An appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed.

10. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, relevance to the journal's scope, research integrity, and compliance with publication requirements. Decisions must not be improperly influenced by personal relationships, institutional interests, commercial considerations, or other inappropriate external pressures.

Al-Mubtadi is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, and responsible review process that supports scholarly quality and public trust in academic publishing.