Focus and Scope
Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction, first published in February year 2017. Progressa Release frequency: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction is 2 times a year, which is published in February and August. The establishment of Progressa: Journal of Islamic religious Instruction sheltered by the College of Sciences Tarbiyah Raden Wijaya Mojokerto Study Program of Islamic Religious education
Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction intends to be the media for the dissemination of research and exchange of scientific works on education among academics, practitioners, regulators, and the general public. Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction not only emphasizes on empirical facts or purely theory, or against one particular method or approach. This journal emphasizes on papers relevant to the whole educational problem by integrating Islamic teachings in its implementation developing learning methodology relevant to the advancement of educational Technology.
Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process and Editorial Decision
All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. Those manuscripts evaluated by editors to be inappropriate to journal criteria are rejected promptly without external review. Manuscripts evaluated to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to double blind reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewer’s recommendation from among several possibilities: rejected, require major revision, need minor revision, or accepted.
The Editor-in-Chief of PROGRESSA: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.
- Author submit the manuscript
- Editor Evaluation [some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process]
- Double-blind peer review process
- Editor Decision
- Confirmation to the authors
PROGRESSA: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction published twice a year (February and August)
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.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
This statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher (Diploma in Islamic Religious Education Study Program, STIT Raden Wijaya Mojokerto).
Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher and the society.
Diploma in Islamic Religious Education Study Program, STIT Raden Wijaya Mojokerto as publisher of this Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Diploma in Islamic Religious Education Study Program, STIT Raden Wijaya Mojokerto and Editorial Board of Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editor in chief of Progressa: Journal of Islamic Religious Instruction is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision is based on the recommendation of the journal's editorial board members and reviewers. The journal abides by legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor confers with the editorial team and reviewers in making this decision.
The editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial team, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by any of the editorial board members and reviewers in their own research.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The journal uses double-blind review process. The reviewers advise the editor-in-chief in making the editorial decision. The editor-in-chief communicates with authors, as required, and helps them in improving quality of their research paper.
The journal editors are committed to provide timely review to the authors. If a reviewer does not submit his/her report in a timely manner, the paper is immediately sent to another qualified reviewer.
Manuscript content is treated with at most confidentiality. The journal uses double blind process. Except for the editor-in-chief, the editors and reviewers cannot discuss paper with any other person, including the authors.
Standards of Objectivity
The editors and reviewers are required to evaluate papers based on the content. The review comment must be respectful of authors. The reviewers are required to justify their decision and recommendation.
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
Authors 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 wherever possible. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide such data within reasonable time.
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. Papers found with such problems are automatically rejected and authors are so advised.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
When a paper is submitted for possible publication, the submitting author makes a written statement that the paper has not been published not it is currently under publication with any other journal. Simultaneous submission is considered unethical and is therefore unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others is required. Authors must cite publications that have led to the authors’ current research.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research reported in the manuscript. The corresponding author has a responsibility to keep co-authors posted with the review process. If accepted, all authors are required to give a signed statement that the research work is their original research work.
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.
Screening for Plagiarism
Guidelines for Reviewers
Responsibility of Peer Reviewer
Peer reviewer is responsible for critiquing by reading and evaluating manuscripts in the field of expertise, then giving constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, how to increase the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript.
Before reviewing, please note the following:
- Is the article requested to be reviewed in accordance with your expertise? If you receive a script that covers the topics that are not appropriate areas of your expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible. Please recommend an alternative reviewer.
- Do you have the time to review this paper? The review process must be completed within two weeks. If you agree and require a longer period, notify the editor as soon as possible, or suggest an alternative reviewer.
- Is there any potential conflict of interest? Meanwhile, conflicts of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer, disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, do not hesitate to contact the editorial office.
When reviewing the article, please consider the following:
- Title: is it clearly illustrating the article?
- Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article?
- Introduction: does it describe the accuracy of matters submitted by the author and clearly state the problem being considered? Typically, the introduction should summarize the context of the relevant research, and explain the findings of the research or other findings, if any, offered for discussion. This research should explain the experiments, hypotheses and methods.
Content of the Article
In order to determine the originality and suitability for the journal, are there any elements of plagiarism over 6% of this paper field? Quick literature search can use certain tools such as Scopus to see if there are similarities from other parts.
- if the study had been previously done by other authors, it is still eligible for publication?
- is the article being fairly new, fairly deep, and interesting to be published?
- does it contribute to knowledge?
- does the article adhere to the standards of the journal?
- Scope - Is the article in line with the objectives and scope of the journal?
Comprehensive and perfect:
- does the author accurately describe how the data is collected?
- is the theoretical basis or reference used appropriate for this study?
- is the exposure design suitable for the answer to the question?
- is there a decent enough information for you to imitate the research?
- does the article identify following procedures?
- are there any new methods? If there is a new method, does the author explain it in details?
- is there any appropriate sampling?
- have the tools and materials used been adequately explained? and
- does the article exposure describe what type of data is recorded; right in describing the measurement?
This is where the author must explain the findings in his/her research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider whether the appropriate analysis has been carried out; the use of statistical tools? If you have a better statistical tool to be used in this study, notify it, and the interpretation need not to be included in this section.
Discussion and Conclusion:
- are the claims in this section is supported by the fair results and quite reasonable?
- does the author compare the research results with other previous ones?
- do the results of research written in the article contradict the previous theories?
- does the conclusion explain how a better scientific research to be followed-up?
Tables and Pictures:
Is it suitable with the referred explanation by showing data which is easy to interpreted and understandable for the readers?
- Authors must be critical mostly to the literature systematic review of the issues, which is relevant to the field of study.
- Reviews should be focused on a single topic.
- All exposure should be in English and written in a god and coherent grammar.
- Easy to understand
- Interesting to read
Things that need to be considered:
- Perspective, a unique perspective that describes experiences and situations related to issues in marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and sustainable, and entrepreneurship.
- The original data and testing, it must present data that offers a new approach to improve systems, processes, and precision of the tools which are used.
- Research policy and observational analysis, it should clarify the feasibility, effectiveness, and implementation on the research results. It is not limited to the topic of marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and sustainable, and entrepreneurship.
- In Practice (case study), The paper should explain the situation regarding the future challenges in marketing management, finance management, strategic management, operation management, human resource management, e-business, knowledge management, management accounting, management control system, management information system, international business, business economics, business ethics and sustainable, and entrepreneurship, within its conclusions, and things which can be learned.
- First Person (Interview)
- Book Reviews
- Insight Technology (Product Review)
- All results of the review submitted by reviewers are confidential
- If you want to discuss the article with a colleague, kindly inform the editor
- Do not contact the author directly.
- Ethical issues:
Plagiarism: if you suspect the article is mostly plagiarism from other authors, please let the editor knows the details
Fraud: It is very difficult to detect a fraud category, but if you suspect the results in the article is not true, please inform the editor
Complete "The Review" by the due date to the editorial office. Your recommendation for the article will be considered when the editor makes a final decision and your honest feedback is highly appreciated.
When you write a comment, please show the part of the comment that is only intended for the editor and parts that can be returned to the author.
Please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office with any questions or problems that you may encounter
This journal charges the following author fees.
Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are required to pay an Article Submission Fee as part of the submission process to contribute to review costs.
Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)
If this paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.
If you do not have funds to pay such fees, you will have an opportunity to waive each fee. We do not want fees to prevent the publication of worthy work.