Generative AI Policies

Islamic Education: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and AI-assisted technologies may support particular stages of academic writing and research communication. To ensure transparency and uphold academic integrity, any use of GenAI in the preparation, writing, analysis, translation, or editing of a manuscript must be clearly disclosed within the article when it makes a substantive contribution. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, argumentation, citations, and ethical integrity of their manuscripts, regardless of AI involvement.

Permitted Use of AI-Assisted Tools

Limited and appropriately supervised use of AI-assisted tools may support:

  • Language editing, grammar correction, clarity, and translation, provided the author checks accuracy and preserves the intended meaning.
  • Preparation of visual representations of genuine research data, provided the tool does not invent, fabricate, or manipulate findings.

All AI-assisted tools must be used under human supervision. Authors are required to carefully review and edit all AI-generated outputs, as such tools may produce content that appears authoritative but is inaccurate, incomplete, or biased. Authors retain full responsibility and accountability for the content of their work.

Under no circumstances may GenAI tools be credited as authors. Such tools cannot assume responsibility for the work, approve a final manuscript, disclose competing interests, or be accountable for breaches of publication ethics.

Prohibited and Unethical Uses

The following uses are incompatible with the journal's proposed standards of responsible scholarly conduct:

  • Submitting AI-generated arguments, literature reviews, interpretation, findings, or analyses as the author's original scholarly contribution without appropriate disclosure and critical verification.
  • Producing, fabricating, altering, or selectively presenting research data, participant statements, educational assessments, images, or results in a misleading manner.
  • Citing fabricated references, non-existent quotations, or inaccurate bibliographic details produced by a tool.
  • Uploading confidential submissions, reviewer reports, identifiable participant information, or otherwise restricted research materials into AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.
  • Using GenAI to replace an editor's independent assessment or a reviewer's confidential and accountable scholarly judgment.

Research involving children, students, teachers, schools, or other educational participants requires particular care with personal information and confidentiality. AI-assisted handling of such information must comply with the applicable research ethics approvals, consent arrangements, and data protection responsibilities.

Disclosure Requirements

Authors should describe substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, analysis, translation, or editing in a transparent statement supplied with the initial submission and included in the manuscript before the reference list when appropriate. The disclosure should identify the tool or service, the purpose of its use, and the author's oversight and verification of the output.

Suggested section title: Generative AI Usage Statement.

During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [name of tool or service] for [specific purpose]. The author(s) reviewed and edited all relevant outputs, verified claims and references where necessary, and take full responsibility for the content of the submitted and published work.

Routine spelling and grammar checks or conventional reference management tools that do not generate substantive manuscript content do not ordinarily require this statement. Where no generative AI was used, a declaration is not ordinarily necessary. Disclosure does not excuse fabricated data, incorrect citations, or other unethical practices.

Editorial Responsibilities and Consequences of Misuse

Editors and reviewers must preserve the confidentiality of manuscripts and may not outsource confidential peer-review or publication decisions to generative AI systems. Where there is credible evidence of undisclosed or unethical use, the editorial team may seek an explanation or supporting evidence, request revision, reject a manuscript, or consider appropriate post-publication action under the journal's publication ethics, misconduct, and retraction policies.

Any determination should be based on a fair assessment of the evidence rather than solely on automated AI-detection scores. The policy should be kept under review as scholarly publishing practices, ethical standards, and relevant technologies develop.