Reviewer Guidelines

All manuscripts submitted to Asatiza: Jurnal Pendidikan are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations to assist the editorial team in assessing the scientific quality and suitability of manuscripts for publication.

The review process aims to ensure that published articles meet high standards in originality, methodological rigor, academic contribution, and relevance to educational research and practice.

1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Before accepting a review assignment, reviewers should consider the following:

Expertise
Ensure that the manuscript aligns with your academic expertise. If the topic falls outside your specialization, please inform the Editorial Team.
Availability
Reviews are normally expected to be completed within two weeks after the manuscript has been assigned.
Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should decline the review if there is any potential conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, or the research topic.
Ethical Concerns
If reviewers suspect plagiarism, data fabrication, or other forms of academic misconduct, please notify the Editorial Team immediately.

2. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate the manuscript based on the following aspects:

Relevance to Journal Scope

The manuscript should align with the focus of Asatiza: Jurnal Pendidikan, particularly in areas such as:

Pedagogical innovation
Educational technology integration
Inclusive and equitable education
Teacher professional development
Islamic education and contemporary educational practices

Originality and Contribution

Does the manuscript offer novel insights or findings?
Does it contribute to the development of educational theory or practice?

Quality of Scholarship

Adequacy of theoretical framework
Engagement with relevant and recent scholarly literature

3. Section-by-Section Evaluation

Section	Evaluation Focus
Title	The title should clearly reflect the content and focus of the manuscript.
Abstract	The abstract should summarize the background, objectives, methodology, key findings, and conclusions.
Introduction	The introduction should present the research background, research gap, objectives, and relevant literature.
Methodology	Reviewers should evaluate the clarity of research design, participants, instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis techniques.
Results & Discussion	Findings should be presented clearly and discussed in relation to existing theories and previous research.
Conclusion	The conclusion should summarize the key findings and provide implications for educational practice or future research.
Tables & Figures	Tables and figures should be clearly labeled and relevant to the study findings.
References	References should follow APA Style (7th Edition) and include recent scholarly sources.
Writing Quality	The manuscript should be written in clear and academic English.

4. Reviewer Recommendation

At the end of the review process, reviewers should provide one of the following recommendations:

Accept Submission – The manuscript is suitable for publication without further revisions.
Revisions Required – The manuscript requires minor revisions before acceptance.
Resubmit for Review – The manuscript requires major revisions and should undergo another round of peer review.
Decline Submission – The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to significant issues in originality, methodology, or relevance.
See Comments – The final decision depends on how the authors respond to reviewer comments.
Submit Elsewhere – The manuscript may have merit but is not suitable for the scope of this journal.

5. Reviewer Comments

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive and specific feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. Comments should distinguish between: