About the Journal

Focus and Scope

 

Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal is a Journal of Islamic Education in the Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training at UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung which aims to accommodate Islamic lecturers, researchers and educators in schools / madrasah in publishing the results of their research in PAI learning.

The scope of Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal includes:
1. Islamic Education in Schools;
2. Islamic Learning in Madrasah;
3. Islamic Learning in Islamic Boarding Schools;
4. Learning Islamic Religion in Higher Education;
5. Tafsir Tarbawy; and
6. Hadith Tarbawy.

 

Peer Review Process

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. 

Manuscript articles that submit by online to Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal will be checked by the  board of editor regarding scope, in house style, plagiarism. The manuscript that qualifies the focus and scope of Jurnal Pendidikan Islam will be continued to the review process which, at least, will be reviewed by reviewers with double blind commitment. The reviewer is a journal partner from the experts who concern about the field of journal. The editor will send an e-mail to the chosen reviewer about the title and contien of manuscript, and also the invitation to log in to journal website to finish the review process. The reviewer logs in to journal website to approve doing the review, to download the manuscript, to send their comment, and to choose the recommendation. The reviewing process by reviewer is done at least in two weeks. The result will be returned to the author to be followed up. The qualified paper will be published in English. 

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment 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.

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

Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal (ISSN 2503-5282, E-ISSN 2598-0971) is a peer-reviewed journal published Islamic religious education laboratory Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of posting an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewed and the publisher. This statement based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal is an important building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. This 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 on standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the public.

Islamic religious education laboratory, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training as publisher of Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing exceptionally seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or additional commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Besides, the Islamic religious education laboratory, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should publish. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not use in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also help the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must treat as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should conduct objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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 reported should accompany by the appropriate 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

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research 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. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original actions and if the authors have used the works, or words of others that this has appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his self-published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the editor of the journal or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Generative AI policies

 

For authors

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation - an overview

Elsevier recognizes the potential of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (“AI Tools”), when used responsibly, to help researchers work efficiently, gain critical insights fast and achieve better outcomes. Increasingly, these tools, including AI agents and deep research tools, are helping researchers to synthesize complex literature, provide an overview of a field or research question, identify research gaps, generate ideas and provide tailored support for tasks such as content organization and improving language and readability. Authors preparing a manuscript for an Elsevier journal can use AI Tools to support them. However, these tools must never be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise and evaluation. AI Tools should always be applied with human oversight and control. Ultimately, authors are responsible and accountable for the contents of their work. This includes accountability for:

  • Carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and impartiality of all AI-generated output (including checking the sources, as AI-generated references can be incorrect or fabricated).

  • Editing and adapting all material thoroughly to ensure the manuscript represents the author’s authentic and original contribution and reflects their own analysis, interpretation, insights and ideas.

  • Ensuring the use of any tools or sources, AI-based or otherwise, is made clear and transparent to readers — for the use of AI Tools we require a disclosure statement upon submission.

  • Ensuring the manuscript is developed in a way that safeguards data privacy, intellectual property and other rights, by checking the terms and conditions of any AI Tool that is used.

Responsible use of AI Tools

Authors must check the terms and conditions of any AI Tool that they use to ensure that the privacy and confidentiality of their data and inputs, including their unpublished manuscripts, is maintained. Particular care should be taken with any personally identifiable data. Images that duplicate or refer to existing copyrighted images, real people, or others’ identifiable products or brands must not be generated, nor any likeness of an individual’s voice. Authors should check for factual errors and for any potential bias.

Authors should also check the terms and conditions of any AI Tool they wish to use to ensure that, they only grant to the AI Tool the right to use their materials to provide the service to them and that they do not grant to the AI Tool any other rights to the materials that they input into the AI Tool (including without limitation the right to train the AI Tool on those materials). They must also ensure that the AI Tool does not impose constraints on the use of outputs from the AI Tool in a way that could restrict the subsequent publication of the relevant article.

Disclosure

Authors should disclose the use of AI Tools for manuscript preparation in a separate AI declaration statement in their manuscript upon submission and a statement will appear in the published work. Authors should document their use of AI, including the name of the AI Tool used, the purpose of the use, and the extent of their oversight. Declaring the use of AI Tools supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant AI Tool. Basic checks of grammar, spelling and punctuation need no declaration. AI use in the research process should be declared and described in detail in the methods section.

Authorship

Authors should not list AI Tools as an author or co-author, nor cite AI Tools as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original and has not been previously published, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and the work does not infringe third party rights, and should familiarize themselves with Elsevier’s Ethics in Publishing policy before they submit.

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images and artwork

We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.

The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions, for editorial assessment.

The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork such as for graphical abstracts is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may in some cases be allowed, if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.

View Elsevier’s generative AI author policies for books

For reviewers

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process

When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Elsevier abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

Elsevier’s AI author policy states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process before submission, but only with appropriate oversight and disclosure, as per our instructions in Elsevier’s Guide for Authors. Reviewers can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references.

Please note that Elsevier owns identity protected AI-assisted technologies which conform to the RELX Responsible AI Principles, such as those used during the screening process to conduct completeness and plagiarism checks and identify suitable reviewers. These in-house or licensed technologies respect author confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluation of bias and are compliant with data privacy and data security requirements.

Elsevier embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process, and we continue to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect authors’, reviewers’ and editors’ confidentiality and data privacy rights.

View Elsevier's generative AI reviewer policies for books

For editors

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal editorial process

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript including any notification or decision letters as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Elsevier abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision and the communication thereof to the authors.

Elsevier’s AI author policy states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process before submission, but only with appropriate oversight and disclosure, as per our instructions in Elsevier’s Guide for Authors. Editors can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the publisher.

Please note that Elsevier owns identity protected AI-assisted technologies which conform to the RELX Responsible AI Principles, such as those used during the screening process to conduct completeness and plagiarism checks and identify suitable reviewers. These in-house or licensed technologies respect author confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluation of bias and are compliant with data privacy and data security requirements.

Elsevier embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process, and we continue to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect authors’, reviewers’ and editors’ confidentiality and data privacy rights.

Publishing System

Plagiarism Checker

To avoid Plagiarism, every submitted manuscript will be screened by Turnitin.

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.

Sponsors

Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal is a journal published by the Laboratory of Islamic Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung in collaboration with Perkumpulan Sarjana Pendidikan Islam Indonesia (PSPII) or Association of Indonesian Islamic Education Scholars based on MoU number: B-016/Jurnal Atthulab /MoU/VII/2019, to facilitate lecturers, researchers and educators of Islamic Religion in schools/madrasas in publishing their research results in the field of PAI learning. This journal is published in 2 editions in one year.

ISSN: 2503-5282 (Print)

ISSN: 2598-0971 (Online)

  • Lembaga Profesi Pendidikan Agama Islam: Perkumpulan Sarjana Pendidikan Islam Indonesia

Sources of Support

Thank you all for your support and cooperation.

Journal History

Atthulab: Islamic Religion Teaching and Learning Journal published by the Laboratory of Islamic Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung in collaboration with Perkumpulan Sarjana Pendidikan Islam Indonesia (PSPII) or Association of Indonesian Islamic Education Scholars based on MoU number: B-016/Jurnal Atthulab /MoU/VII/2019, to facilitate lecturers, researchers and educators of Islamic Religion in schools/madrasas in publishing their research results in the field of PAI learning. This journal is published in 2 editions in one year.

ISSN: 2503-5282 (Print)

ISSN: 2598-0971 (Online)