Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Tanwiruna: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Sosial Keagamaan implements a rigorous, transparent, and accountable peer-review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scholarly credibility of all published articles. The journal applies a single-blind peer-review policy in which reviewers remain anonymous to authors, while authors’ identities are visible to reviewers. This mechanism supports a fair evaluation while maintaining academic standards. All manuscripts are reviewed based on originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the fields of education and socio-religious studies.

Submission and Initial Evaluation
Upon submission, each manuscript is screened by the editorial team to evaluate:
(1) alignment with the journal’s scope;
(2) compliance with the author guidelines and template;
(3) originality, including a similarity/plagiarism check; and
(4) overall academic quality.
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for technical corrections or rejected prior to peer review. Manuscripts passing the initial screening are registered and forwarded to the review stage.

Peer Review
Tanwiruna conducts single-blind peer review as the standard policy. In specific situations where editorial assessment indicates the need to strengthen impartiality, the journal may apply a double-blind review (both author and reviewer identities are concealed). Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers may come from the editorial board or external scholars of comparable standing. Authors are expected to present their work ethically and responsibly and must avoid fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or inappropriate data manipulation.

The editorial office communicates review outcomes and revision requests via email and/or through the journal system. Authors may request clarification on review comments or editorial decisions. Appeals can be considered when authors provide substantive justification and supporting evidence.

Review Criteria
Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts using the following criteria:
Scientific Quality: soundness of argumentation, conceptual clarity, and methodological robustness.
Originality: novelty and meaningful contribution to scholarship.
Relevance: consistency with the journal’s aims, scope, and readership.
Clarity of Presentation: coherence, structure, academic writing quality, and completeness of supporting information.
Ethical Standards: compliance with research ethics, responsible authorship, and publication ethics.
Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive, actionable feedback to help authors improve the manuscript’s quality and scholarly impact.

Review Duration
Tanwiruna strives to provide an efficient and timely review process. Reviewers are assigned a defined timeframe to complete evaluations. As a general target, the journal seeks to deliver initial review decisions within approximately 8 weeks, although timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity. Authors will be notified if significant delays occur.

Decision and Revision
After receiving reviewers’ reports, the editorial team evaluates the recommendations and determines one of the following decisions:
Accept: accepted without revision.
Minor Revision: small revisions required prior to acceptance.
Major Revision: substantial revisions required; resubmission and possible re-review.
Reject: not suitable for publication due to quality and/or relevance considerations.

When revisions are required, authors should submit the revised manuscript and a response to reviewers within the following indicative timeframes:
Minor Revision: 2–4 weeks.
Major Revision: 4–8 weeks. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation depending on the extent of changes.

Editorial Decision
The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief and/or the editorial board, taking into account reviewer comments, the manuscript’s originality, contribution to the field, relevance to scope, and compliance with ethical and technical requirements. In cases of substantially conflicting reviewer recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief may request an additional independent review or make an editorial judgment based on the overall evaluation. Conditional acceptance may be issued when specific mandatory revisions must be satisfied prior to final approval.

Confidentiality
Tanwiruna maintains strict confidentiality throughout the review process. Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and may not share, distribute, or discuss submissions with any party outside the peer-review process.

Review Process Improvement
Tanwiruna is committed to continuously improving its peer-review system. Feedback from authors and reviewers is valued and may be used to strengthen the efficiency, fairness, and transparency of editorial and review procedures.