Workflow

Iqra’a: Sharjah Libraries & Information Journal

From Submission to Publication

• Introduction

  • The Iqra’a: Sharjah Libraries & Information Journal upholds the highest standards of academic and professional publishing by fostering a collaborative and transparent process for manuscript submission, review, and publication.
  • Our workflow is designed to engage authors, reviewers, editors, and publishing staff in a structured and ethical framework, ensuring adherence to the journal's specific standards and scholarly excellence.
  • This document provides a guide for all stakeholders involved in the manuscript management process, outlining their roles and responsibilities at each stage.
  • By maintaining rigorous ethical guidelines and a commitment to quality, this workflow supports the seamless progression of manuscripts from submission to publication.
  • Through this structured approach, the Iqra’a Journal aims to facilitate scholarly communication and contribute meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge in library science, information management, and related disciplines.

• The Manuscript Journey

  • The following sections outline the step-by-step process for manuscript management, starting with the submission stage.
  • Each phase is designed to ensure that manuscripts meet the journal's standards while providing transparent guidance to contributors and stakeholders.

• 1. Author Submission

  • 1.1. Pre-Submission Checklist

    • Authors ensure adherence to journal-specific guidelines:
    • Word count, formatting, file types, and citation style.
    • Ethical standards, including conflict-of-interest declarations and plagiarism checks.

  • 1.2. Submission via System

    • Authors submit the manuscript and supplementary materials (e.g., figures, tables, data files) through the journal’s submission system.
    • Submission system confirms receipt and notifies the author and Editor.

• 2. Initial Editorial Review

  • 2.1. Preliminary Screening

    • The Editor reviews the manuscript for:
    • Compliance with technical and formatting guidelines.
    • Relevance to the journal’s scope and focus.
    • Basic quality of content and originality.

  • 2.2. Preliminary Decision

    • Based on the initial review:
    • Reject outright: If the manuscript is irrelevant, poorly scoped, or low-quality.
    • Request revisions: If technical and formatting corrections are needed.
    • Assign to Reviewers: If it meets basic criteria for peer review.

• 3. Peer Review Process

  • 3.1. Reviewer Expectations

    • The Editor communicates:
    • Review timelines.
    • Evaluation criteria (e.g., originality, methodology, scientific rigor).

  • 3.2. Reviewer Assessment

    • Reviewers provide detailed feedback on:
    • Content relevance and contribution.
    • Methodological soundness and data validity.
    • Overall scientific soundness.

  • 3.3. Reviewer Recommendations

    • Reviewers submit feedback with a recommendation:
    • Accept.
    • Request revisions (major or minor).
    • Reject.

• 4. Editorial Decision

  • 4.1. Editor Review

    • The Editor reviews reviewer feedback and makes a decision:
    • Reject: Communicates the decision to the author.
    • Request Revisions: Provides detailed feedback for improvement.
    • Accept: Approves for the next stage.

  • 4.2. Author Revisions

    • Authors revise the manuscript based on reviewer and editor comments and resubmit within the stipulated timeline.
    • Resubmitted manuscripts undergo a secondary review if required.

• 5. Copyediting

  • 5.1. Copyeditor Review

    • Once accepted, the manuscript is sent to the Copyeditor, who:
    • Checks grammar, syntax, and adherence to the journal’s style guide.
    • Ensures proper citation and referencing format.

  • 5.2. Revisions if Required

    • If issues are identified, the Copyeditor communicates with the author for corrections.
    • Final copyedited manuscript is forwarded to the Layout Editor.

• 6. Layout Editing

  • 6.1. Manuscript Formatting

    • The Layout Editor formats the manuscript into the journal’s publication template, ensuring:
    • Consistency in visuals, tables, and references.
    • Alignment with journal style and publication standards.

  • 6.2. Final Formatting Review

    • The formatted manuscript is sent to the Copyeditor for:
    • Review of typographical accuracy.
    • Check for layout consistency.

  • 6.3. Revisions if Required

    • The Layout Editor addresses any issues flagged by the Copyeditor.

• 7. Final Editorial Review

  • 7.1. Editor Review

    • The Editor ensures:
    • Content and formatting consistency.
    • Compliance with publication standards.

  • 7.2. Approval by Editor-in-Chief

    • The finalized manuscript is sent to the Editor-in-Chief for:
    • Final review and approval for publication.

• 8. Proof Approval

  • 8.1. Author Review of Final Proof

    • Authors review the final proof to ensure accuracy in content and formatting.
    • Authors confirm corrections, if any, are applied.

• 9. Publication

  • 9.1. Final Steps

    • Approved manuscripts are:
    • Disseminated online.
    • Prepared for Print-on-Demand (POD) production, if applicable.

  • 9.2. Post-Publication Corrections

    • If errors are identified after publication:
    • Errata or corrigenda are issued.
    • Retraction policies are applied as necessary.

• Final Note

  • We appreciate the dedication of all contributors to this mission and encourage continued engagement with our journal.
  • By adhering to this workflow, we ensure that every publication reflects the values of excellence, integrity, and scholarship that define Iqra’a.
  • Thank you for your commitment to upholding the standards and vision of our journal.
  • We look forward to your contributions to advancing the field.