About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Elkawnie is a journal of Integration Science and Technology with Islam. It's covering research and technology in the field of study of Architecture, Biology, Chemistry, Environmental Engineering, ICT, Physical Engineering, and other science and technology field. In particular, Elkawnie's journal discusses the development of research and technology in contributing to development as part of Muslim scientists in the academic sphere.

Peer Review Process

Elkawnie Journal uses a double-blind peer-review policy, in which the identity of both authors and the reviewers is kept hidden until the submitted article is published.

The research article submitted to this online journal will be peer-reviewed by at least 2 (two) reviewers. The accepted research articles will be available online following the journal peer-reviewing process. The final decision on article acceptance will be made by the Editors according to the Reviewer's comments. The language used in this journal is English or Indonesia.

Peer review is designed to assess the validity, quality, and often the originality of articles for publication. Its ultimate purpose is to maintain the integrity of science by filtering out invalid or weak-quality articles.

From a publisher's perspective, peer-review functions as a filter for content, directing better quality articles to better quality journals and so creating journal brands.

Running articles through the process of peer-review adds value to them. For this reason, publishers need to make sure that peer review is robust.

Editor Feedback

"Pointing out the specifics about flaws in the paper's structure is paramount. Are methods valid, is data presented, and are conclusions supported by data? (Editor feedback)

If an editor can read your comments and clearly understand your recommendation's basis, then you have written a helpful review. (Editor feedback)

Peer-Review at Its Best

What peer review does best is to improve the quality of published papers by motivating authors to submit good quality work and helping to improve that work through the peer-review process.

Each submitted article is evaluated on the following basis:

1. The originality of its contribution to the field of scholarly publishing; 
2. The soundness of its theory and methodology gave the topic; 
3. The coherence of its analysis; 
4. Its ability to communicate to readers (grammar and style); and 
5. The writing format matched the journal's submission guide. The normal turn-around time for screening and evaluation of manuscripts is 2 to 6 months from the date of submission. Assuming, the incoming paper is accepted by the editor will be forwarded to the section editor according to the field for approximately one day. Then the Section editor will analyze it for 14 days. The section editor will send it to 2 or more reviewers within an estimated one month. The results obtained will be notified to the author one day after summarizing the reviewer's decision.

Open Access Policy

Elkawnie 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. This started since the journal was formed in 2015.

Publication Ethics

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

Elkawnie's Publication Ethics is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. Elkawnie's Journal follows clear ethical standards for publication to ensure high-quality scientific work and to enhance public trust in their findings. Thus, Elkawnie journal applies this policy to all its owned journals in adherence to the Best Practice Guidelines outlined in the COPE Core Practices. This policy should be read with our guidelines for authors and reviewers. 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 author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society. 

(Refer to COPE)

The editorial board of Elkawnie takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing 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. 

Publication and authorship
• All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international or national reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
• The review process is a blind peer review.
• The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
• The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
• If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
• Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
• The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
• No research can be included in more than one publication.

Authors’ responsibilities
• Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
• Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
• Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
• Authors must participate in the peer-review process.
• Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
• All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
• Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
• Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
• Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
• Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Reviewers’ responsibilities
• Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
• Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
• Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
• Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
• Reviewers should not review 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.

Editors’ responsibilities
• Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
• Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
• Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
• Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
• Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
• Editors should have a clear picture of the research’s funding sources.
• Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers’ importance, originality, plagiarism detection, clarity, and relevance to the publication’s scope.
• Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
• Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
• Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
• Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
• Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
• Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
• Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

Publication Decision

The editor Elkawnie is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. 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. To ensure originality, all submitted papers will through Turnitin took charge by the assigned journal editor.

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 be used in an editor's own 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 assist 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 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.

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 are unacceptable.

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.

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 manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment 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 paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Elkawnie's Journal follows clear ethical standards for publication to ensure high-quality scientific work and to enhance public trust in their findings. Thus, Elkawnie journal applies this policy to all its owned journals in adherence to the Best Practice Guidelines outlined in the COPE Core Practices. This policy should be read with our guidelines for authors and reviewers.

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to Elkawnie will be screened for plagiarism using Turnitin plagiarism detection tools. Elkawnie will immediately reject articles leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool, by a member of the editorial team. The papers submitted to Elkawnie must have a similarity level of less than 30%.

Plagiarism is the exposure of another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. To correctly judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

• An author can copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the source. This practice can be identified by comparing the source and the manuscript/work who is suspected of plagiarism.
• Substantial copying implies an author to reproduce a significant part of another author, without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The substantial term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, is often used in the context of Intellectual property. Condition refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.
• Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words, or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more difficult form to be identified.

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

The author is not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts, because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscripts and works invested by the publisher.

If the author still requests withdrawal of his/her manuscript when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for publication in this journal. However, it is unethical to withdraw a submitted manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal.

The withdrawal of the manuscript after the manuscript is accepted for publication.  The withdrawal of the manuscript is only allowed after the withdrawal penalty has been carried out by the author, namely by replacing other writings of comparable quality as directed by editors and reviewers. Posts that will be published in the next edition and entries that are withdrawn will be marked with "Retraction". If the author doesn't agree to the penalty, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for publication in this journal. Even, his/her previously published articles will be removed from our online system.

Refer/Quoting to COPE

Article Retraction

Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by Elsevier:

• A retraction note titled “Retraction: [article title]” signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
• In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
• The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
• The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the .pdf indicating on each page that it is “retracted.”
• The HTML version of the document is removed. 

References Management

Every article accepted by Elkawnie uses reference management software. exp: Mendeley and EndNote

Budapest Open Access Initiative

Read the Budapest Open Acces Initiative

An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution and the only role for copyright in this domain should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead, they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because the price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.

Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, but they are also within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director of Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

Copyrights, Permissions, Reprints & Licensing

Elkawnie Journal a uses license CC-BY SA

Elkawnie Journal uses license CC-BY-SA or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly works.

This license permits anyone to compose, repair, and make derivative creation even for commercial purposes, as long as appropriate credit and proper acknowledgement to the original publication from Elkawnie is made to allow users to trace back to the original manuscript and author.

Readers are also granted full access to read and download the published manuscripts, reprint and distribute the manuscript in any medium or format.

 

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Generative AI

Artificial intelligence and generative AI are assisting the editorial process of journals.

The emergence of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies served as the impetus for this policy, which aims to provide more transparency and guidance for writers, editors, and reviewers. Elkawnie will carefully monitor any new developments in this field and make any policy adjustments or refinements.

Elkawnie's AI author policy allows authors to use AI-assisted technologies and generative AI during the writing process before submission, as long as they follow our guidelines in Elkawnie's Guide for Authors and only use them to enhance their paper's language and readability. Editors can locate this declaration in a distinct section preceding the list of references, situated at the bottom of the work. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has contravened our AI policies, they should notify the publisher. 

Generative AI is artificial intelligence technology that can create diverse material forms, such as text, images, audio, and synthetic data. Some examples of AI models are ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, and DALL-E.

Sponsors

Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Islam Negeri Ar-Raniry Banda

• University Islam Negeri Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh
• Center for Research and Community Service (LP2M) UIN Ar - Raniry, Banda Aceh
• Faculty of Science and Technology UIN Ar-Raniry, Banda Aceh

Contributors

• Universitas Islam Negeri Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh
• Badan Kerjasama Perguruan Tinggi Negeri (BKS PTN) Wilayah Barat
• Asosiasi Dosen Biologi dan Pendidikan Biologi PTKIN
• Ikatan Arsitek Indonesia Wilayah Aceh
• Himpunan Kimia Indonesia Wilayah Aceh
• Indonesian Association of Scientific Journal Editors
• Relawan Jurnal Indonesia Wilayah Aceh

Journal History

The History of Elkawnie Journal was started by switching the status of IAIN Ar-Raniry to UIN Ar-Raniry while the Faculty of science and technology of UIN Ar-Raniry was formed on October 13, 2013. The Elkawnie Journal was formed on December 12, 2014, and began releasing the first time in Volume 1 Number 1 June 2015.

REQUEST INDEXING

Elkawnie has been submitted to

 

• Submission Received: August 24, 2018
• Submission Accepted: August 28, 2018

SINTA

• Submission Received: July 8, 2019
• Submission Accepted: October 12, 2019

WoS

• Submission Received: October 8, 2020
• Submission Accepted : (under review)