Review Process
This journal operates a double-anonymised review process. The General Editor initiates and coordinates the preliminary assessment of all contributions to determine suitability for publication in the journal. Articles deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the quality and value of the paper. A potential author will get a response within three to six months of submission of an article. Where a manuscript may need revisions to address the concerns and recommendations emanating from the review process, this is communicated to the author to make necessary revisions and resubmit for consideration. The General Editor guides the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.
To ensure anonymity in the review of manuscripts, identifying material should be kept out of the manuscript. A front-page giving authorship, institution affiliation, biographical statement, and acknowledgements is provided in a separate file. Only the title is provided for identification on the manuscript and abstract received by the reviewers.
AI Policy
AJOKE Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The African Journal of Kingdom Education, published by Testament Theological Seminary (TTS) Press recognize the impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on research, scholarly writing, and publication. Therefore, TTS promotes the ethical and responsible use of AI in research and academic writing. Our goal is to ensure the integrity, academic honesty, transparency, originality, data protection, and ethical standards of scholarly work. This policy outlines ethical guidelines and best practices for the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by authors, peer reviewers, and editors in the submission, review, and publication processes, which may evolve as the AI field continues to develop.
Guidelines for Authors
- Authors must ensure their work is original and written by them.
- Authors are responsible for ensuring the validity, accuracy, and integrity of their submission content.
- Be aware that the Large Language Model (LLM) might reproduce substantial text from other sources. Check sources to avoid plagiarism.
- Ensure that the use of artificial intelligence tools adheres to ethical guidelines, including data privacy protocols.
- Disclose any artificial intelligence tools used for transparency. Explicitly mention the use of Generative AI tools or language models in a disclosure statement within the manuscript that includes: the full name of the tool used (with version number), how it was used, and the reason for use.
See example below:
Disclosure of AI usage During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the published work.
- The Disclosure Statement should be included in the Acknowledgements section. This level of transparency allows editors to determine whether Generative AI tools have been used and if they have been used responsibly. Responsible use of AI in research and academic writing means using AI as a supportive tool rather than a substitute for human intelligence. It also requires maintaining academic integrity, transparency, accountability, data security and protection, as well as ethical standards. The editorial board reserves the right to assess manuscripts for responsible AI use.
- Artificial intelligence tools should not be referenced as authors.
Peer Reviewers and Editors
- The use of AI or LLMs for peer review presents confidentiality and copyright issues. Therefore, journal editors and reviewers should not enter materials from submitted manuscripts into generative AI, as it would constitute a violation of the confidentiality of the peer review process.
- Reviewers are trusted to maintain confidentiality and to ensure the work they review is not shared or used outside the peer-review process (as recommended by COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers). Using AI or similar technologies compromises the confidentiality process and could lead to bias, misinformation, and erroneous or incomplete conclusions. The assessment during peer review must reflect the reviewer’s own opinions and suggestions, based on his/her expertise and knowledge, without input from any AI technology.
Guidelines for Editors
- AI tools may assist editors in tasks such as initial manuscript screening, plagiarism detection, and identifying potential reviewers. However, final decisions should be made by human editors to ensure unbiased editorial decisions. Editors should not upload unpublished manuscripts, including any associated files, images, or information, into Generative AI tools.
References
- COPE Council. COPE position – Authorship and AI. https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms
- American Psychological Association (APA) (August 2025). APA Journals policy on generative AI. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/resources/publishing-tips/policy-generative-ai
- Wiley. Using AI tools in your writing: A guide for book authors. https://www.wiley.com/enus/publish/book/resources/ai-guidelines/
Testament Theological Seminary Press Statement and Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (2026). Unpublished Material.