(1) Articles submitted to the journal "JUMMY: Ibrahimy Multidisciplinary Journal" are original scientific papers and have never been published in any media before.
(2) Articles are written using standard Indonesian language rules (EYD) with a variety of scientific writing, not a variety of popular scientific works and oral communication.
(3) The length of the writing is between 10 - 25 pages (between 4,000-6,000 words), typed using the Microsoft Word program in Times New Roman font size 12 (10 abstracts) with single spacing and using A4 paper size (3-2.5-2.5 -2.5).
(4) Articles are submitted in MS Word or Doc format.
(5) Manuscripts can also be sent as an e-mail attachment to the address: or
(6) All manuscripts are reviewed by editors according to their field of expertise. Article authors are given the opportunity to make improvements (revisions) to the manuscript based on recommendations/suggestions from the editor. Confirmation of the publication or rejection of the manuscript will be notified in writing.
(7) Everything related to permission to quote or use computer software to create manuscripts or other matters related to intellectual property rights (IPR) carried out by the author of the article, along with the legal consequences that may arise because of this, is the full responsibility of the author of the article.



Title should be short, clear and informative, but not exceed 15 words.

Abstract and keywords are written in English. The length of each abstract is 100-250 words. The abstract contains the essence of the contents of the entire article which is presented clearly, completely and completely. The abstract is not a copy-paste of the conclusion. The components contained in the abstract are IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion). Introduction is an explanation of the main reasons for conducting research. Methods are an explanation of how research works. Result is an explanation of the results obtained in the research. Discussion is the conclusion of the research.

The introductory section contains the background, research context, and results of the literature review. Provide an introduction to the substance of the manuscript according to the topic and the theoretical and practical reasons behind writing the manuscript. Contains explicitly the direction, aim, objectives, novelty and usefulness of the manuscript. A brief description of what has been done/discovered by other researchers previously. Then a description of the problem to be studied. Citations on other research related to the results are better postponed to discussion.

The method section contains an explanation in the form of a paragraph about the approach or type of research, data sources, data collection techniques, and data analysis actually carried out by the researcher, with a length of 5-10% of the total length of the article. For each measurement result reported in the Results section, the method used to obtain the result must be known. The use of standard procedures can only be referred to. A description of the method is written in this Methods section. Explain the statistical analysis procedures used. Use of supporting instruments (tables, diagrams) accompanied by reference sources or information.

The research results section contains a presentation of the analysis results related to the research questions. Each research result must be discussed. The discussion contains the meaning of the results and comparison with theories and/or similar research results. The length of the presentation of results and discussion is 75-85% of the total length of the article. If Results are separate from Discussion, the Results section only presents research results without having to discuss them, new discussions are carried out in Discussion. Start writing down the results in a systematic way. Do not present images from table data (use only one).
The information presented must be arranged neatly sequentially and in accordance with the theoretical hierarchy. If you want to emphasize the results obtained, you should present them in the form of other numbers, for example in the form of percentages or differences. If you want to show the number in question, just refer to the table containing the number. Discussions need to be written in clear language and do not use sentences that are too long.
Collections of similar research can be referred to in groups. The discussion presentation should also have a systematic flow, do not discuss an aspect repeatedly. Use a systematic framework so that the discussion will end at a point that will support the conclusion. Research implications (theoretical and applied) need to be emphasized in the discussion.

The conclusion/closing section contains research findings in the form of answers to research questions or in the form of the essence of the results of the discussion. Conclusions are presented in paragraph form. The conclusion is not a "copy and paste" of the discussion. When drawing conclusions, don't speculate. Conclusions must be based on facts from research results.

Acknowledgments are placed before the bibliography. In the thank you note, it is necessary to mention the funding agency (along with the contract number) as documentation. Recognition of significant individual or institutional contributions in the conduct of research and writing.


The bibliography and sources cited must be consistent. This means that the bibliography only contains cited sources and vice versa. The literature used is primary sources in the form of research articles in journals or research reports (including theses, theses and dissertations). Meanwhile, for managing citations and bibliography, you must use the Mendeley or Zotero application.
The composition of quotations or bibliography, 80% of which comes from journals and the remaining 20% may come from books or magazines or something similar. The format for writing quotations and bibliography must be arranged according to the APA style reference (Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association).

Verify each in-text citation with a reference list for correct citation information
If the source is in another language, write the original title then add the English translation as in the example below:

Afgani, M. W., Suryadi, D., & Dahlan, J. A. (2019). The enhancement of pre-service mathematics teachers’ mathematical understanding ability through ACE teaching cyclic. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 153–167.

Ariefia, H. E., As’ari, A. R., & Susanto, H. (2016). Proses berpikir siswa dalam menyelesaikan permasalahan pada materi trigonometri [Students' thinking processes in solving problems in trigonometry materials]. Journal of Mathematics Learnin/Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika, 1(1), 28-32.

As’ari, A. R., Tohir, M., Valentino, E., Imron, Z., & Taufiq, I. (2017). Buku guru matematika (revisi) [Mathematics teacher handbook (revised)]. Center for Curriculum and Bookkeeping.

Barham, A. I. (2020). Investigating the development of pre-service teachers’ problem-solving strategies via problem-solving mathematics classes. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 129–141.

Chasanah, C., Riyadi, R., & Usodo, B. (2020). The effectiveness of learning models on written mathematical communication skills viewed from students’ cognitive styles. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 979–994.

Ellis, A. B. (2011). Generalizing-promoting actions: How classroom collaborations can support students’ mathematical generalizations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(4), 308–345.

Farib, P. M., Ikhsan, M., & Subianto, M. (2019). Proses berpikir kritis matematis siswa sekolah menengah pertama melalui discovery learning [The mathematical critical thinking process of junior high school students through discovery learning]. Journal of Mathematics Education Research/Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 99–117.

Hulaikah, M., Degeng, I, Sulton, S., & Murwani, F. D. (2020). The effect of experiential learning and adversity quotient on problem solving ability. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 869–884.

Iswari, I. F., Susanti, E., Hapizah, H., Meryansumayeka, M., & Turidho, A. (2019). Design of problem-solving questions to measure mathematical thinking type abstraction. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1), 1–6.

Kent, L. (2017). Examining mathematics classroom interactions: elevating student roles in teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 3(2), 93–102.

Lane, C. P., & Harkness, S. S. (2012). Game show mathematics: Specializing, conjecturing, generalizing, and convincing. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(2), 163–173. 

Lesseig, K. (2016). Conjecturing, generalizing and justifying: Building theory around teacher knowledge of proving. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 17(3), 1–31.

Mason, J., Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (2010). Thinking mathematically. Pearson Education.

Munawwarah, M., Laili, N., & Tohir, M. (2020). Keterampilan berpikir kritis mahasiswa dalam memecahkan masalah matematika berdasarkan keterampilan abad 21 [Students' critical thinking skills in solving mathematical problems based on 21st century skills]. Alifmatika: Journal of Mathematics Education and Learning/Alifmatika: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Matematika, 2(1), 37–58.

Nurhidayah, D. A. (2016). The thinking process of junior high school students’ in solving mathematic problem based on gender. International Seminar on Education, 1(1) 625–629.

Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.

Primasatya, N. (2016). Analisis kemampuan berpikir matematis calon guru sekolah dasar dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematika [Analysis of mathematical thinking ability of prospective primary school teachers in solving mathematical problems]. JME: Journal of Mathematics Education/JPM: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 50–57.

Rangka, I. B., Kasmanah, K., Solihatun, S., Folastri, S., Sjamsuri, A., Setiadi, A., Prasetyaningtyas, W. E.,  Ifdil, I., Ardi, Z., Helsa, Y., Suranata, K., Parwito, P., Erwinda, L., Fadli, R. P., Zola, N., Rahim, R., Elwan, L. O. M., Jopang, J., & Bakti, B. (2019). Assessing of student’s performance and their math test in Islamic school: A Rasch perspective. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1175(1), 1–6.

Reyes-Cedeno, C. C., Rivas-Cun, H. I., Espinoza-Cevallos, C. E., & Rojas-Garcia, C. R. (2019). Assessment of the practices for early mathematics thinking in preschools of Pasaje City, Ecuador. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(4), 1063–1070.

Santos-Trigo, M., & Reyes-Martínez, I. (2019). High school prospective teachers’ problem-solving reasoning that involves the coordinated use of digital technologies. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(2), 182–201.

Saiful, S., Hobri, H., & Tohir, M. (2020). Analisis metakognisi siswa berbasis lesson study for learning community (LSLC) ditinjau dari gaya kognitif [Metacognition analysis of students based on lesson study for learning community (LSLC) in terms of cognitive style]. Alifmatika: Journal of Mathematics Education and Learning/Alifmatika: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Matematika, 2(1), 73–91.

Son, A. L., Darhim, D., & Fatimah, S. (2020). Students’ mathematical problem-solving ability based on teaching models intervention and cognitive style. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 209–222.

Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 1–36.

Sumarna, N., & Herman, T. (2017). The increase of critical thinking skills through mathematical investigation approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 812(1), 1–8.

Tabak, S. (2019). 6th, 7th and 8th grade students’ misconceptions about the order of operations. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(3), 363–373.

Thalhah, S. Z., Tohir, M., Nguyen, P. T., Shankar, K., & Rahim, R. (2019). Mathematical issues in data science and applications for health care. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2), 4153–4156.

Tohir, M., Abidin, Z., Dafik, D., & Hobri, H. (2018). Students creative thinking skills in solving two dimensional arithmetic series through research-based learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1008(1), 1-11. 

Tohir, M. (2017). Pengembangan bahan ajar olimpiade matematika berdasarkan model pemecahan masalah untuk meningkatkan kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa [Development of instructional materials based problem-solving mathematical olympiad for students improves mathematical reasoning ability] [Unpublished master's thesis]. University of Jember.

Tohir, M. (2019). Keterampilan berpikir kreatif siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal olimpiade matematika berdasarkan level metakognisi [Students' creative thinking skills in solving mathematics olympiad problems based on metacognition levels]. Alifmatika: Journal of Mathematics Education and Learning/Alifmatika: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Matematika, 1(1), 1–14.

Tohir, M., Susanto, S., Hobri, H., Suharto, S., & Dafik, D. (2018). Students’ creative thinking skills in solving mathematics olympiad problems based on problem-solving Polya and Krulik-Rudnick model. Advanced Science Letters, 24(11), 8361–8364.

Xu, B., Cai, J., Liu, Q., & Hwang, S. (2019). Teachers’ predictions of students’ mathematical thinking related to problem posing. International Journal of Educational Research, 4(5), 101427.

Yusnia, D. (2018). Analysis the ability of students problem-solving on counting operations of algebra form. MUST: Journal of Mathematics Education, Science and Technology, 3(1), 1–6.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.