Peer Review Process

Wahana Karya Ilmiah Pendidikan, published by the Master's Program in Islamic Religious Education, Universitas Singaperbangsa Karawang (UNSIKA), applies a peer-review process to maintain the quality, originality, validity, and academic integrity of published articles in the field of education, particularly Islamic education.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment before being considered for external peer review. The journal applies a Double-Anonymized Peer Review model, in which the identities of authors are concealed from reviewers and the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors.

Manuscripts proceeding to external peer review are normally evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers with academic expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject. The review process considers the manuscript's scholarly contribution, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with research and publication ethics.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Submission and Administrative Check

The editorial office checks the submitted manuscript for completeness, compliance with the journal's author guidelines and manuscript template, required declarations, and other essential submission requirements. Manuscripts may be returned to authors for administrative corrections before proceeding to editorial evaluation.

2. Desk Review and Initial Editorial Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor evaluates the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, academic quality, methodological appropriateness, research integrity, and overall suitability for peer review.

Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope, have substantial academic or methodological deficiencies, fail to meet essential submission requirements, or raise significant ethical concerns may be rejected without external peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial evaluation are normally assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in education, Islamic education, educational policy, curriculum development, learning and teaching, educational management, or other related fields.

Reviewers should have no conflict of interest that could compromise the objectivity or independence of their assessment. The editorial team is responsible for selecting reviewers whose expertise is appropriate to the subject and approach of the manuscript.

4. Double-Anonymized Peer Review

The journal applies a Double-Anonymized Peer Review model. Reviewers receive a manuscript prepared without identifying information about its authors, while reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors.

Authors are expected to ensure that the anonymized manuscript file does not directly reveal their identities through author names, institutional affiliations, acknowledgements, or other identifying information. Where necessary, identifying details in self-citations or supplementary materials should be handled in a way that preserves anonymity without compromising scholarly accuracy.

5. Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers assess manuscripts on scholarly and technical grounds. Depending on the nature of the submission, their evaluation may cover the originality of the study, clarity of the research problem and objectives, theoretical or conceptual framework, research design, methodology, data analysis, interpretation of findings, quality of discussion, validity of conclusions, ethical considerations, and contribution to educational scholarship and practice.

6. Editorial Decision

After considering the reviewers' reports and the editor's own assessment, the responsible editor communicates an editorial decision to the corresponding author. Possible decisions include:

• Accept Submission;
• Minor Revision;
• Major Revision or Resubmit for Review; or
• Decline Submission.

The decision depends on the manuscript's academic merit, relevance to the journal, quality of the reviewers' assessments, and compliance with editorial and ethical requirements.

7. Author Revision

When revision is requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' and editor's comments carefully. A revised manuscript should be accompanied by a response document explaining how each substantive comment has been addressed. Where an author disagrees with a recommendation, the response should provide a clear scholarly justification.

8. Re-Evaluation

A revised manuscript may be evaluated by the responsible editor or returned to the original reviewers or additional reviewers, particularly when substantial revisions have been requested. Further revisions may be required if the manuscript has not yet met the journal's academic and publication standards.

9. Final Decision

The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the responsible editor. The decision is based on academic quality, reviewer reports, the adequacy of revisions, ethical compliance, and suitability for the journal. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not automatically determine the publication outcome.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are generally requested to consider the following aspects, as relevant to the manuscript:

• Relevance to the focus and scope of Wahana Karya Ilmiah Pendidikan;
• Originality and significance of the research;
• Clarity of the research problem, objectives, and research questions;
• Adequacy of the theoretical or conceptual framework;
• Appropriateness and rigor of the research design and methodology;
• Reliability and adequacy of data collection and analysis;
• Quality of the findings and their interpretation;
• Depth, coherence, and relevance of the discussion;
• Consistency between research objectives, findings, and conclusions;
• Contribution to educational theory, policy, research, or practice;
• Quality and relevance of scholarly references;
• Compliance with research and publication ethics; and
• Clarity of language, organization, and academic presentation.

Review Timeline

The journal seeks to conduct peer review efficiently while maintaining appropriate academic standards. Reviewers may be requested to complete an individual review assignment within approximately four weeks, subject to reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

The total time required to reach an editorial decision may vary depending on reviewer availability, the subject and complexity of the manuscript, the number of revision rounds, and the responsiveness of the authors. The stated review period is therefore a target rather than a guarantee of acceptance or publication within a specific period.

Reviewer Independence and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any relationship or interest that could reasonably affect their impartiality. Reviewers should decline an invitation when a financial, professional, institutional, collaborative, personal, or other conflict could compromise their independent assessment.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively. They must not request unnecessary citations for the purpose of increasing their own citation counts or those of particular authors, journals, or institutions. Any suggested references should be relevant to the manuscript's subject and scholarly argument.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, reproduce, or use unpublished information contained in a manuscript for personal, academic, commercial, or other purposes without appropriate authorization.

Reviewer reports and communications associated with the peer-review process are treated as confidential editorial records and should be used only for purposes related to manuscript evaluation and editorial decision-making.

Submissions from Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and Editorial Board members may submit manuscripts to Wahana Karya Ilmiah Pendidikan, provided that their submissions are handled independently to prevent actual or perceived conflicts of interest.

An editor or Editorial Board member must not participate in the editorial evaluation, reviewer selection, management of peer review, or publication decision concerning their own manuscript. Such submissions should be assigned to another qualified editor and processed in accordance with the journal's standard peer-review procedures.

Editorial Independence

The final publication decision rests with the responsible editor. Decisions are based on scholarly merit, relevance to the journal's scope, research integrity, peer-review reports, the adequacy of revisions, and compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical policies. Acceptance is not guaranteed solely on the basis of a reviewer's recommendation.